Formal Opinion 480: Confidentiality Obligations for Lawyer Blogging and Other Public Commentary¶
American Bar Association Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility. (2018). Formal Opinion 480: Confidentiality Obligations for Lawyer Blogging and Other Public Commentary: Confidentiality Obligations for Lawyer Blogging and Other Public Commentary.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Confidentiality
- Harm may aggravate the consequence but is not an element of it, which is why a disclosure revealing nothing the recipient did not already know remains a breach.
This sourceHolds that Model Rule 1.6 provides no exception for information that is generally known or contained in a public record, so the out-of-scope disclosure is itself the violation without any showing of harm or novelty to the recipient.
- Harm may aggravate the consequence but is not an element of it, which is why a disclosure revealing nothing the recipient did not already know remains a breach.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:7098970a7955 · see in the full table