2002EngagedScholarship @ Cleveland State University (Cleveland State University)Requires access

Is Attorney-Client Confidentiality Necessary?

Lloyd B. Snyder

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Broad confidentiality rules with narrow, limited exceptions serve well the interests of attorneys while subjecting other parties to significant harm. The ABA's failure to consider the complexity and moral ambiguity of the decision to withhold or disclose confidential information is unfortunate. This Article explores the evolution of this broad rule of confidentiality. I argue that the organized bar has proven to be incapable of establishing reasonable guidelines on confidential information. Nor is it likely that it will do much better in the future. Rather than attempting to establish a better set of confidentiality rules, the bar should get out of the business of regulating confidentiality. The bar should defer to the courts in establishing disclosure standards for client information on a case by case basis under the evidentiary attorney-client privilege.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Broad confidentiality rules with narrow, limited exceptions serve well the interests of attorneys while subjecting other parties to significant harm. The ABA's failure to consider the complexity and moral ambiguity of the decision to withhold or disclose confidential information is unfortunate. This Article explores the evolution of this broad rule of confidentiality. I argue that the organized bar has proven to be incapable of establishing reasonable guidelines on confidential information. Nor is it likely that it will do much better in the future. Rather than attempting to establish a better set of confidentiality rules, the bar should get out of the business of regulating confidentiality. The bar should defer to the courts in establishing disclosure standards for client information on a case by case basis under the evidentiary attorney-client privilege.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Broad confidentiality rules with narrow, limited exceptions serve well the interests of attorneys while subjecting other parties to significant harm. The ABA's failure to consider the complexity and moral ambiguity of the decision to withhold or disclose confidential information is unfortunate. This Article explores the evolution of this broad rule of confidentiality. I argue that the organized bar has proven to be incapable of establishing reasonable guidelines on confidential information. Nor is it likely that it will do much better in the future. Rather than attempting to establish a better set of confidentiality rules, the bar should get out of the business of regulating confidentiality. The bar should defer to the courts in establishing disclosure standards for client information on a case by case basis under the evidentiary attorney-client privilege.

Key concepts: Confidentiality, Internet privacy, Business, Power of attorney, Computer security, Law, Computer science, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Is Attorney-Client Confidentiality Necessary? — Research Paper | ScholarLens