Duties to the Public · 2-4% of the exam
22.3.3Improper influence on government officials (Rule 8.4(e))
On this page
- Rule 8.4(e) — Improper influence.
Why
A lawyer who advertises pull with a judge or an official is telling a client that outcomes are for sale and the process is scenery. Whether the pull is real changes nothing about what the listener now believes about the tribunal that will decide the matter.
Plain English
You cannot tell a client or prospect that you can deliver results through improper channels to a judge or official. The statement is the violation whether or not you have the influence or any corrupt outcome occurs. The bar reaches the claim made outright or by implication, and it covers claimed ability to achieve results by means that violate the Rules or other law.
Rule
Rule 8.4(e) — Improper influence.
Rule 8.4(e) — Improper influence. An attorney may not claim — outright or by implication:
the ability to improperly sway a government body or official, or
the ability to deliver outcomes through methods that contravene the Rules or other law.
Whether or not the attorney actually possesses any such influence is beside the point — the claim of corrupt access is itself the disciplinable act.
Example 1
Ex. 1
Hana is a personal-injury litigator. In a pitch meeting with a prospective client, she says the judge on the case plays poker with her every other Tuesday. She adds that she can therefore land a result no other firm in town can. She means to suggest the social tie will produce favorable rulings, not just an ordinary acquaintance. Rule 8.4(e) is violated. The statement implies an ability to improperly influence the presiding judge. Whether Hana and the judge actually play poker, and whether any judge would ever be swayed, doesn't matter. The improper-access claim itself is the disciplinable act. Assign the violation to Hana's sentence, not to her poker calendar.
Trap
Questions · 1
Q 01ch22-e08
Question 1 of 1 · Rule 8.4(e)
Attorney handles licensing disputes before a state agency. At a dinner, Attorney met a business owner whose permit application was under review by that agency and pitched for the work. Attorney said that a long private arrangement with the officers who decide these applications lets Attorney produce a result no other firm in the region can produce. Attorney meant the listener to understand that the outcome would come from that access rather than from the strength of the application. In fact Attorney has no relationship of any kind with anyone at the agency, and the business owner hired a different firm the next week. Is Attorney subject to discipline?
Keys 1 to 4 choose.