Client Confidentiality · 6-12% of the exam
7.2.1Certain death or substantial bodily harm (Rule 1.6(b)(1))
On this page
- Rule 1.6(b)(1) — certain death or substantial bodily harm
Why
Confidentiality buys candor, but there is one price the profession will not pay for it: a lawyer sitting quietly on knowledge that could keep someone from being killed or badly hurt. This exception gives the lawyer room to act when a life or a body is at stake, without conscripting every lawyer into an informant.
Plain English
A lawyer may reveal information to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm. Death need not be imminent, and reasonably certain substantial bodily harm also qualifies. The threat may come from any source, and the lawyer's services need not have been used in connection with it. The permission is discretionary, and it reaches future or ongoing threats rather than past harm that can no longer be prevented.
Rule
Rule 1.6(b)(1) — certain death or substantial bodily harm
A lawyer MAY reveal information to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm.
"Reasonably certain": death need not be imminent; reasonably certain substantial bodily harm also qualifies.
Covers threats from any source, including the client harming others, third parties harming anyone, or threats directed at the client.
No services-used requirement: unlike the financial harm exceptions, the lawyer's services need not have been used in connection with the threat.
Permissive, not mandatory: the lawyer may choose not to use this exception without violating Rule 1.6.
Future or ongoing threats only: the exception does not cover disclosure aimed at addressing past death or bodily harm that cannot be prevented.
Example 1
Ex. 1
Ivan, charged with illegal industrial dumping, tells his lawyer a company site is leaching toxins into groundwater; serious illness and possible death are reasonably certain. His lawyer may report to health authorities (no nexus between the lawyer's work and the threat required) but may also decline. The exception creates a door; it doesn't force anyone through it. Stop at the word may before you answer; nothing in Ivan's facts turns it into must.
Trap
Tip
Questions · 2
Q 01ch07-e03
Question 1 of 2 · Rule 1.6(b)(1)
Attorney was retained by Client, a machine-tool maker, for the single purpose of registering trademarks. During a meeting about a filing deadline, Client mentioned that a coolant line in one of its plants had begun venting a chemical into the ventilation system, and that workers on the night shift were reasonably certain to suffer serious lung injury if nothing changed. Client added that the company had decided against repairs because they cost too much. Attorney's engagement has never touched the plant, the coolant line, or any safety question. Attorney now wants to alert the state occupational safety agency. May Attorney reveal what Client said?
Keys 1 to 4 choose.