Me. R. Prof. Cond. 8.4
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
Me. R. Prof. Cond. 8.4
COMMENT
[1] Lawyers are subject to discipline when they violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so or do so through the acts of another, as when they request or instruct an agent to do so on the lawyer's behalf. Paragraph (a), however, does not prohibit a lawyer from advising a client concerning action the client is legally entitled to take.
[2] Many kinds of unlawful conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law, such as offenses involving fraud and the offense of willful failure to file an income tax return. However, some kinds of offenses carry no such implication. Traditionally, the distinction was drawn in terms of offenses involving "moral turpitude." That concept can be construed to include offenses concerning some matters of personal morality, such as adultery and comparable offenses, that have no specific connection to fitness for the practice of law. A lawyer should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to law practice. offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice are in that category. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation.
[3] Legitimate advocacy does not violate paragraph (d). However, by way of example, a lawyer who, in the course of representing a client, knowingly manifests by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, violates paragraph (d) when such actions are prejudicial to the administration of justice. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a trial judge's finding that peremptory challenges were exercised on a discriminatory basis does not alone establish a violation of this rule.
[4] A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law.
[5] Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer's abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of lawyers. The same is true of abuse of positions of private trust such as trustee, executor, administrator, guardian, agent and officer, director or manager of a corporation or other organization.
REPORTER'S NOTES:
Model Rule 8.4(2002) is substantively equivalent to M. Bar. R. 3.2(f), 3.4(g) and 3.6(g). The Task Force recommended the term "unlawful," rather than the 2002 Model Rule terms "illegal," and "criminal." The Task Force thought that the term "unlawful" was inclusive of and broader than criminal conduct. it is clear that if a lawyer engaged in criminal conduct, he or she would violate these Rules.
The Task Force observed that "conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice" is one upon which courts and ethics commissions are reluctant to expand. The Task Force was mindful of the various illustrations provided in Maine Professional Ethics Advisory opinions. For example the Law Court has found that when a lawyer converts client funds, such conduct is prejudicial to the administration of justice. Because the Task Force thought Model Rule 8.4(2002) set forth a sound and concise articulation of the rules addressing attorney misconduct, it recommended adoption of Model Rule 8.4(2002) with the noted modifications.
Guidance - June 2019
This amendment, which adds new Rule 8.4(g), is intended to dispel uncertainty as to what conduct is prohibited. As with any mandate in a rule or a statute, the extent of enforcement or initiation of formal disciplinary proceedings will depend on the level of intentionality and seriousness of the reported violation.
Response to complaints and disciplinary actions initiated under the new Rule 8.4(g), as with disciplinary actions under the present Maine Rules of Professional Conduct, will be subject to similar reasonable and measured enforcement choices, particularly as experience with the new Rule and Continuing Legal Education programs promote better understanding within the Maine legal community of ethical obligations to achieve compliance with the Rule.