Register for free to upload content and post comments

A user-driven online community and resource library for ethics teachers, scholars, and practitioners worldwide.

Fidelity Diluted: Client Confidentiality Gives Way to the First Amendment & Social Media in Virginia State Bar, ex rel. Third District Committee v. Horace Frazier Hunter

Submitted by Jan Jacobowitz on Mon, 07/21/2014 - 05:23
Author(s)
jacobowitz, Jan L.
Jesson, Kelly Rains
Author(s)' contact information
jjacobowitz@law.miami.edu
Publication
Campbell Law Review
Volume number
36
Issue number
1
Year
2014
First page number
75
Last page number
106
Country
United States
Abstract
Fidelity and confidentiality are hallmarks of the attorney-client relationship. However, as social media use permeates the legal profession, new challenges have arisen to the traditional interpretation of client confidentiality. The Virginia Supreme Court’s recent holding, which concludes that to deny attorney Horace Hunter the ability to blog about his clients’ cases without client consent, after the case concludes and based upon what is found in the public record, is to deny Hunter his First Amendment right of free speech has spurned controversy. The Hunter opinion arguably undermines the long standing legal ethics rule of confidentiality and strikes at the heart of the attorney-client relationship as it has been defined and has evolved since the late nineteenth century. Ultimately, the central issue for the legal profession is whether an attorney’s relationship with a client and the simultaneous duty of confidentiality owed to the client survives the completion of the case notwithstanding what may appear in a public record and regardless of First Amendment considerations. The underlying components that define the attorney-client relationship and the history, evolution, and moral underpinnings of the ethical rule of client confidentiality suggest that the Virginia Supreme Court has diluted client confidentiality in a manner that warrants both further exploration and extreme concern for the fundamental attorney-client relationship.
Status
Published
Select the option that describes the rights you hold in the attached content
I do not hold complete rights to all intellectual property in the attached content, but have permission from all people or entities who do hold rights in the attached content to post it on the Forum website and to grant the license, if any, that I have chosen below.
Select a license for the attached content
"Copy": I give permission for other users to download the attached content and copy, distribute, and repost it on the web, as long as they credit the author(s) and the publication and provide relevant identifying citation information (volume, page numbers, year of publication, city of publication), do not change the work in any way, and do not use it commercially. ("Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives" Creative Commons license)