Analysis of Ethical Dilemma
Analysis of Ethical Dilemma
Introduction and Facts
It is important that individuals take into account the impact of their decision on themselves, others potentially involved, institutions and the world. Individuals can make ethical decision only if they understand the potential effects of their decision. Ethical decision making is an intricate process where individuals must consider impact of decisions or actions resulting from the decisions made on individuals or institution. The basis of ethical decision-making encompasses balance and choice (Levin & Mather, 2012). Law is one of ...view middle of the document...
1.6(a) (2013). However, Rule 1.6 (b) allows the lawyers to reveal information that affect representation of a client provided that they believe it is reasonably necessary. Rule 1.6(b) states that “A lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary.” ABA Model of Prof’l Conduct R. 1.6(b) (2013). This is necessary especially in situations where the lawyer suspects that the client might utilize his services to pursue criminal activities, which may cause substantial injury to financial interest of other parties. In the paradigm case, Justin King has plans to lie in the court if he is asked whether he had taken beer prior the accident. He plans to lie about toxicology report. Lying in an upcoming trial constitutes a perjury. In this case, Justin’s plans to lie about the toxicology report amounts to a perjury, which is a crime. As such, there is need for the lawyer to conform to Rule 1.6(b) of ABA Model of Professional Responsibility. Justin’s legal counsel should reveal the much needed information about his action prior the accident. If the false information that is likely to be provided in court takes effect, then the financial interests of the complainant would be negatively affected. In conclusion, it is advisable that Justin’s lawyer disclose any relevant information in the upcoming trial without interfering with ethical duty of confidentiality as stipulated in the ABA Model of Professional Conduct.
The second issue is whether the scope of lawyer’s representation and sharing of duties between lawyer and client applies in this case. Rule 1.2(a) of ABA Model of Professional Responsibility requires a lawyer to adhere to client’s decisions in reference of the objectives of representation. This rule also compels a lawyer to consult with the client on the appropriate ways of handling matters in an upcoming trial. A lawyer should always truly represent a client. Lawyers undertake legal matters behalf of the client hence they are impliedly authorized. However, lawyers’ conduct in regard to consulting the client and considering client’s decisions when they are settling matter in court should conform to paragraphs (c) and (d) of Rule 1.2 of ABA Models. Rule 1.2(c) states that, “A lawyer may limit the scope of the representation if the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent.” ABA Model of Prof’l Conduct R. 1.2(c) (2013). This is supported by Rule 1.2(d), which states that “A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law.” ABA Model of Prof’l Conduct R. 1.2(d) (2013). In this case, Justin King plans to lie about the...