Comment-On-Disciplinary-Rules-Proposed-Amendments.20091228

www.texaslawyer.comDecember 28, 2009 vol. 25 • No. 39 LegaL ethics[ ]C D C r ’ p D Dby BRUCE A. CAMPBELL breadth and depth of the rule amendments would n Oct. 20, the Texas take more space than is Supreme Court issued available here. Therefore, broad and extensive pro- I have included only a few posed amendments to the changes that likely will Texas Disciplinary Rules affect many lawyers.of Professional Conduct. Until the amendments, The court noted that it there was no disciplinary will accept public com- rule or definition in the ments about the changes disciplinar y rules that Ountil Dec. 31. required that a client’s Under the amendments there are consent be “informed con-five newly defined terms that apply sent.” Nor did the rules to the entire body of rules. There require that consent be are 40 revised rules. There are four evidenced in writing. new rules — five if you count Rule Rule 1.00(k) provides 1.00, the new terminology rule. And that “informed consent” there are 11 rules that have not been denotes the agreement amended except through the terminol- by a person to a proposed ogy changes added by Rule 1.00. course of conduct after Not since Jan. 1, 1990, have the the lawyer has adequately explained While it is expected that the issue of disciplinary rules undergone this level the material risks of and reasonably informed consent will be measured of revision. About a year after the 1990 available alternatives to the proposed based on ...