Category: Ethics

Under ABA Model Rule 1.16(d), lawyers must surrender client papers upon withdrawal, but the definition of “papers and property” is unclear. Following this ambiguity, states have generally adopted two approaches: the “entire file” approach, which requires lawyers to provide all materials, and the “end product” approach, limiting it to final products. Effective March 3, 2025, Idaho implemented the “entire file” approach with RPC 1.16A, detailing materials to be provided and allowing lawyers to charge for copying and delivery.

The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a legal malpractice claim due to its being time-barred in Wood v. Dunn & Black. The court underscored that a client’s criticism of a law firm can trigger the statute of limitation, emphasizing that assertions made in a letter initiated the three-year clock for filing a claim.

The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed an order prohibiting a pro se party from contacting a represented opponent in Ryan v. Timmerman. The plaintiff, injured as a minor in a car accident, sued 14 years later as an adult. Despite requests to channel communication through their lawyer, the plaintiff and her father contacted the represented defendants, leading to court sanctions. The Court of Appeals upheld the prohibition on direct contact and the exclusion of the father’s testimony, citing the trial court’s broad case management authority. This case is an unusual application of the court’s inherent case management authority.