Right, because it is so difficult to understand the complex and difficult subject of...I hope I'm spelling this right...
something called "acting". Anyone who cannot distinguish between fantasy and reality is not fit to be a judge.
If Bloomburg's argument is true (we know it's not, but pretend), and local rules can't make police deviate from the state code of conduct, doesn't that mean Bloomburg's precious "stop 'n' frisk" is illegal too under the very same argument?
It's really more a quibble over labelling. I'm not saying lawyers don't have to do these things; I'm saying it's not a matter of ethics, it's the entire reason the lawyer is being paid in the first place.
Not doing that isn't an ethical violation, it's a "you aren't even doing your fucking job right!" violation.
Just splitting hairs really, no point in arguing it too much.
I don't think that's an ethical duty, it's more like the entire reason lawyers exist to begin with.
The client is the one that's going to be responsible for their lawyer's actions, so it's their absolute right to know what their lawyers are doing under their name. HDP should have cut and run and filed a bar complaint immediately after they heard that.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Mark D..