|
|
|
ONLINE FEATURES
Book Reviews
BW Video
Columnists
Interactive Gallery
Newsletters
Past Covers
Philanthropy
Podcasts
Special Reports
BLOGS
The Auto Beat
Byte of the Apple
Europe Insight
Eye on Asia
Getting In
Investing Insights
The New Entrepreneur
NEXT: Innovation Tools & Trends
On Media
Technology at Work
The Tech Beat
Traveler's Check
TECHNOLOGY
Product Reviews
Tech Stats
Hands On
AUTOS
Home Page
Auto Reviews
Car Care & Safety
INNOVATION
& DESIGN Home Page Architecture Brand Equity Auto Design Game Room SMALLBIZ Smart Answers Success Stories Today's Tip FINANCE Investing: Europe Annual Reports Bloomberg BW50 SCOREBOARDS Hot Growth Companies: 2008 Mutual Funds Info Tech 100 B-SCHOOLS Undergrad Programs Rankings & Profiles |  |
JUNE 28, 2004
A Free Pass For Attorneys It's time to end lawyers' immunity on abuse Let's be fair: Lawyers aren't supposed to be sweet. Under the American Bar Assn.'s Model Code of Professional Responsibility, attorneys have a duty to defend their clients like Dobermans. "The advocate may urge any permissible construction of the law favorable to his client," reads Canon 7 of the code. Lawyers like to cite that when accused of overly aggressive tactics. But it fails to take into account an important point: Lawyers don't only answer to their clients. They are also responsible to the legal system. As self-regulated professionals, attorneys are not mere mercenaries. They're custodians -- officers of the court expected to engage in civilized warfare. "While a lawyer may take steps in good faith and within the framework of the law to test the validity of rules," Canon 7 continues, "he is not justified in consciously violating such rules." These competing pressures -- to serve clients and the court -- are not evenly balanced, as the tactics of Boeing's lawyers amply demonstrate. All too often, corporate attorneys forget their duties to the system and do whatever it takes to win. It's no mystery why: Duty to clients is enforced by zealous in-house lawyers while duty to the courts is monitored by lax judges and state bar associations. Until these cops walk their beats more aggressively, there's little reason to think lawyers will behave better. In theory, attorneys who hide evidence and abuse attorney-client privilege are subject to serious sanctions. Judges can slap them with fines and toss out their clients' cases. Bar-association disciplinarians can drive them out of the guild -- and even recommend criminal prosecution. But discovery abuse almost always receives mild sanctions -- especially when committed by large law firms and counsel for prestigious companies. "There is always a level of politesse among elites," says Susan P. Koniak, a professor of legal ethics at Boston University School of Law. "Once lawyers and law firms reach a certain status, they almost become above reproach." It's a problem that goes beyond the hardball of class actions. Lawyers played key roles in the collapse of Enron, Tyco International (TYC ), Global Crossing (GLBCE ), and others. Yet almost alone among other pros, they've paid a comparatively small price for their misdeeds. Why? It's not because they behaved better but because their machinations are harder to discover and harder to explain to the public. So auditors, analysts, mutual-fund managers, and investment bankers watch their steps more closely these days. But for attorneys, it's still business as usual.  By Mike France Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.  Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed. Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video. To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here. Learn more, go to the BusinessWeekOnline home page  | | |
 Copyright 2004, Bloomberg L.P.Terms of Use | Privacy Notice |
Printer-Friendly Version
