2010-06 (March 2, 2010)
Attorneys; Reporting Misconduct; Canons 1, 2 & 3
Issue: Does a
Judicial Official have a duty to report
unprofessional conduct of an out-of-state attorney
who testified under oath in a Connecticut case that
the attorney had commingled funds in the attorney’s
single law office account which he holds in a state
in which commingling of funds is an ethical
violation and, if so, how the Judicial Official
should report the misconduct?
Response:
Based upon the information provided, the Committee
members unanimously determined that the Judicial
Official should report the misconduct. Commingling
of funds is an ethical violation in Connecticut and
in the jurisdiction in which the attorney maintains
an office. The Judicial Official’s duty to report
such conduct is based upon the requirements in Canon
1 (a judge should participate in establishing,
maintaining, and enforcing, and should observe, high
standards of conduct), Canon 2(a) (a judge should
respect and comply with the law and should act at
all times in a manner that promotes public
confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the
judiciary), and Canon 3(b)(3) (a judge should take
or initiate appropriate measures against a judge or
lawyer for unprofessional conduct of which the judge
may become aware). The Commentary to Canon 3(b)(3)
states that a judge may report a lawyer’s misconduct
to an appropriate authority. The Committee noted
that a commonly used method to report misconduct
that occurs on the record is to forward a copy of a
transcript to the appropriate disciplinary authority
with a cover letter noting that the matter is being
referred for such consideration as the disciplinary
authority deems appropriate. However, the Judicial
Official may report the misconduct to the
appropriate authority in any manner that he/she
determines is appropriate under the circumstances.