(b) A lawyer shall not intentionally:
(1) Fail to seek the lawful
objectives of a client through reasonably available means permitted
by law and the disciplinary rules; or
(2) Prejudice or damage a
client during the course of the professional relationship.
(c) A lawyer shall act with reasonable promptness
in representing a client.
Comment
[1] The duty of a lawyer, both to the client and
to the legal system, is to represent the client zealously within the
bounds of the law, including the Rules of Professional Conduct and other
enforceable professional regulations, such as agency regulations applicable
to lawyers practicing before the agency. This duty requires the lawyer
to pursue a matter on behalf of a client despite opposition, obstruction,
or personal inconvenience to the lawyer, and to take whatever lawful
and ethical measures are required to vindicate a client’s cause
or endeavor. A lawyer should act with commitment and dedication to the
interests of the client. However, a lawyer is not bound to press for
every advantage that might be realized for a client. A lawyer has professional
discretion in determining the means by which a matter should be pursued.
See Rule 1.2. A lawyer’s workload should be controlled so that
each matter can be handled adequately.
[2] This duty derives from the lawyer’s membership
in a profession that has the duty of assisting members of the public
to secure and protect available legal rights and benefits. In our government
of laws and not of individuals, each member of our society is entitled
to have such member’s conduct judged and regulated in accordance
with the law; to seek any lawful objective through legally permissible
means; and to present for adjudication any lawful claim, issue, or defense.
[3] The bounds of the law in a given case are often
difficult to ascertain. The language of legislative enactments and judicial
opinions may be uncertain as applied to varying factual situations.
The limits and specific meaning of apparently relevant law may be made
doubtful by changing or developing constitutional interpretations, ambiguous
statutes, or judicial opinions, and changing public and judicial attitudes.
[4] Where the bounds of law are uncertain, the action
of a lawyer may depend on whether the lawyer is serving as advocate
or adviser. A lawyer may serve simultaneously as both advocate and adviser,
but the two roles are essentially different. In asserting a position
on behalf of a client, an advocate for the most part deals with past
conduct and must take the facts as the advocate finds them. By contrast,
a lawyer serving as adviser primarily assists the client in determining
the course of future conduct and relationships. While serving as advocate,
a lawyer should resolve in favor of the client doubts as to the bounds
of the law, but even when acting as an advocate, a lawyer may not institute
or defend a proceeding unless the positions taken are not frivolous.
See Rule 3.1. In serving a client as adviser, a lawyer, in appropriate
circumstances, should give a lawyer’s professional opinion as
to what the ultimate decision of the courts would likely be as to the
applicable law.
[5] To prevent neglect of client matters in the event
that a sole practitioner ceases to practice law, each sole practitioner
should prepare a plan, in conformity with applicable rules, that designates
another competent lawyer to review client files, notify each client
that the lawyer is no longer engaged in the practice of law, and determine
whether there is a need for immediate protective action. See
D.C. App. R. XI, § 15(a) (appointment of counsel by District of
Columbia Court of Appeals, on motion of Board on Professional Responsibility,
where an attorney dies, disappears, or is suspended for incapacity or
disability and no partner, associate or other responsible attorney is
capable of conducting the attorney’s affairs).
[6] In the exercise of professional judgment, a lawyer
should always act in a manner consistent with the best interests of
the client. However, when an action in the best interests of the client
seems to be unjust, a lawyer may ask the client for permission to forgo
such action. If the lawyer knows that the client expects assistance
that is not in accord with the Rules of Professional Conduct or other
law, the lawyer must inform the client of the pertinent limitations
on the lawyer’s conduct. See Rule 1.2(e) and (f). Similarly, the
lawyer’s obligation not to prejudice the interests of the client
is subject to the duty of candor toward the tribunal under Rule 3.3
and the duty to expedite litigation under Rule 3.2.
[7] The duty of a lawyer to represent the client
with zeal does not militate against the concurrent obligation to treat
with consideration all persons involved in the legal process and to
avoid the infliction of needless harm. Thus, the lawyer’s duty
to pursue a client’s lawful objectives zealously does not prevent
the lawyer from acceding to reasonable requests of opposing counsel
that do not prejudice the client’s rights, being punctual in fulfilling
all professional commitments, avoiding offensive tactics, or treating
all persons involved in the legal process with courtesy and consideration.
[8] Perhaps no professional shortcoming is more widely
resented by clients than procrastination. A client’s interests
often can be adversely affected by the passage of time or the change
of conditions; in extreme instances, as when a lawyer overlooks a statute
of limitations, the client’s legal position may be destroyed.
Even when the client’s interests are not affected in substance,
however, unreasonable delay can cause a client needless anxiety and
undermine confidence in the lawyer’s trustworthiness. Neglect
of client matters is a serious violation of the obligation of diligence.
[9] Unless the relationship is terminated as provided
in Rule 1.16, a lawyer should carry through to conclusion all matters
undertaken for a client. If a lawyer’s employment is limited to
a specific matter, the relationship terminates when the matter has been
resolved. If a lawyer has served a client over a substantial period
in a variety of matters, the client sometimes may assume that the lawyer
will continue to serve on a continuing basis unless the lawyer gives
notice of withdrawal. Doubt about whether a client-lawyer relationship
still exists should be eliminated by the lawyer, preferably in writing,
so that the client will not mistakenly suppose the lawyer is looking
after the client’s affairs when the lawyer has ceased to do so.
For example, if a lawyer has handled a judicial or administrative proceeding
that produced a result adverse to the client but has not been specifically
instructed concerning pursuit of an appeal, the lawyer should advise
the client of the possibility of appeal before relinquishing responsibility
for the matter.
[10] Rule 1.3 is a rule of general applicability,
and it is not meant to enlarge or restrict any specific rule. In particular,
Rule 1.3 is not meant to govern conflicts of interest, which are addressed
by Rules 1.7, 1.8, and 1.9.
