Dorsey partner and former director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (OLPR) William Wernz discusses the appropriate role of the comments to Minnesota's Rules of Professional Conduct in a Minnesota Lawyer article. According to Wernz, it remains unclear whether the comments are truly dispositive as "guides to interpretation" of the ethics rules.
The text of the 400-plus comments now far exceeds that of the rules. For example, Rule 1.7, on current client conflicts, occupies half a column in the Rules of Court desk-book, while the 35 comments to Rule 1.7 take up over four double-columned pages. Notwithstanding this, the Minnesota Supreme Court has declined to acknowledge the comments as court-sanctioned "guides to interpretation," considering them instead a mere "convenience."
Accordingly, the recent decision by the OLPR to enforce the comments as generally binding on Minnesota attorneys has created considerable uncertainty in the professional discipline system, says Wernz. He counsels any lawyer facing discipline by the OLPR based on the language of the comments to carefully consider appeal.
Read the article here.
The article "Comments to Professional Rules: Guidance or Basis for Discipline?" was published in the July 24, 2006 edition of Minnesota Lawyer, and is reprinted with permission.