In the Matter of Revising the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement 2002

Summary

An order of the Montana Supreme Court adopting amendments to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement 2002. The amendments address complaint dismissal procedures, private admonitions, confidentiality and disclosure of disciplinary information, admissibility of disciplinary counsel materials, and approval of discipline by consent. The amendments were made effective July 2, 2003.

Holdings

1. The court adopted amendments to Rules 3, 5, and 10, with modifications suggested by the Commission on Practice; adopted the proposed amendment to Rule 13; adopted amendments to Rule 20; and amended Rule 26 as suggested.
2. The court denied the petition to amend Rule 9A(8) to impose a $750 administrative fee in all formal disciplinary proceedings.
3. The amended rules authorize Disciplinary Counsel to dismiss a complaint without prejudice when the complaint does not appear to fall within the court's disciplinary jurisdiction or the facts do not appear to warrant disciplinary action, subject to notice and review procedures.
4. A record of a private admonition may be considered by Adjudicatory Panels and Review Panels when determining discipline to be recommended or imposed in a subsequent disciplinary proceeding involving the same lawyer.
5. Before a formal complaint is filed, Disciplinary Counsel may disclose the pendency, subject matter, and status of an investigation when confidentiality has been waived, the matter concerns criminal conviction or reciprocal discipline, the allegations are generally known to the public, or disclosure is needed to protect the public, administration of justice, or legal profession.
6. The conclusions, opinions, and recommendations of Disciplinary Counsel, investigators, or special counsel are not relevant or admissible for any purpose in quasi-judicial or judicial forums, except in proceedings before the Commission on Practice and the Montana Supreme Court in a disciplinary action.
7. An Adjudicatory Panel's approval of a tendered admission is final when the stated discipline is a private admonition, with or without costs; in all other instances, the tendered admission remains subject to approval or rejection by the Montana Supreme Court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Montana Supreme Court should adopt proposed amendments to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement 2002.
2. Whether the proposed amendment imposing a $750 administrative fee in all formal disciplinary proceedings should be adopted.
3. Whether the rules should authorize dismissal without prejudice of certain disciplinary complaints, permit consideration of private admonitions in later disciplinary proceedings, expand disclosure of otherwise confidential disciplinary information, restrict use of disciplinary counsel opinions and recommendations in other proceedings, and clarify approval of tendered admissions.

Disposition

other