Ethics Advisory Opinions

Issued December 8, 2006

1. Issue: May a current or former client’s access to information in his client file in a criminal matter be restricted by his attorney?

August 25, 2004

1 Issue: In litigation to enforce an oral contract allegedly made by a corporate defendant’s former employee on behalf of the corporation, where the former employee was not a member of the control group, may the plaintiff’s attorney contact the ex-employee without the consent of the corporate defendant’s attorney?

December 2, 2004

Issue: Under what circumstances is it permissible for corporate counsel to assert that counsel concurrently represents present and former corporate employees whose testimony is relevant to a claim and ethically preclude opposing counsel’s access to those corporate employee witnesses?

(Approved October 29, 1999)

On May 28, 1999, the Utah State Bar Board of Bar Commissioners (the Commission) approved Utah Ethics Advisory Opinion No. 99-03,1which held that nothing in the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct prohibits a defense lawyer from making an ex parte contact with plaintiff's treating physician in a personal-injury or medical-malpractice matter.

(Approved August 27, 1999)

Issue: As a part of a criminal plea bargain agreement in a DUI case, may either the prosecuting attorney or the defense lawyer seek the concurrence of the investigating police officer not to respond to a subpoena lawfully issued by the Utah Driver License Division in connection with the related driver-license revocation hearing, a state administrative proceeding?