Advertisement

Rule 1.0 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct: Purpose and Function of the Rules

Rule 1.0 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct: Purpose and Function of the Rules I am going to cover the entirety of the California Rules of Professional Conduct. From start to finish!
This video covers "Rule 1.0: Purpose and Function of the Rules of Professional Conduct"
Don't forget to subscribe to my channel!

Here is the language of Rule 1.0:

(a) Purpose.
The following rules are intended to regulate professional conduct of lawyers through discipline. They have been adopted by the Board of Trustees of the State Bar of California and approved by the Supreme Court of California pursuant to Business and Professions Code sections 6076 and 6077 to protect the public, the courts, and the legal profession; protect the integrity of the legal system; and promote the administration of justice and confidence in the legal profession. These rules together with any standards adopted by the Board of Trustees pursuant to these rules shall be binding upon all lawyers.

(b) Function.
(1) A willful violation of any of these rules is a basis for discipline.
(2) The prohibition of certain conduct in these rules is not exclusive. Lawyers
are also bound by applicable law including the State Bar Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6000 et seq.) and opinions of California courts.
(3) A violation of a rule does not itself give rise to a cause of action for damages caused by failure to comply with the rule. Nothing in these rules
or the Comments to the rules is intended to enlarge or to restrict the law
regarding the liability of lawyers to others.

(c) Purpose of Comments.
The comments are not a basis for imposing discipline but are intended only to provide guidance for interpreting and practicing in compliance with the rules.

(d) These rules may be cited and referred to as the “California Rules of Professional Conduct.”

lawyer,attorney,shechet,litigation,ethics,California,rules of professional conduct,Rule 1.0,

Post a Comment

0 Comments