Court requests comments on ethics amendments
The Tennessee Supreme Court entered an order today (June 22, 2009) soliciting written comments from the bench, bar and public and any other interested parties regarding a petition for Adoption of Amended Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct. The deadline for written comments, to be sent to the Administrative Office of the Courts, is Dec. 16.
The Tennessee Bar Association on May 13, 2009, filed with the Tennessee Supreme Court a comprehensive set of amendments to the Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct. The project, which represents the first major amendment to the rules since they were adopted in 2002, was approved by the TBA House of Delegates and Board of Governors at their April meetings.
Here are the documents in PDF format for review:
Previous filings
Proposed changes to ethics rules available for comment
The Tennessee Supreme Court has issued two orders soliciting comment on proposed amendments to the Rules of the Tennessee Supreme Court. The deadline for submitting written comments on the amendments is March 9, 2009.
• Order seeking comment on proposed Amendment to Rule 7, Section 10.01 of the Rules of the Tennessee Supreme Court
• Order seeking comment on proposed Amendment to Rule 8, Sections 5-5 and 8-5 of the Rules of the Tennessee Supreme Court
The TBA Board of Governors in June 2008 authorized release of a proposed set of refinements to the Rules of Professional Conduct for comment. The proposal is the first thorough examination of the rules since their adoption in March 2003 and represents a more than two-year effort by the Standing Committee on Ethics & Professional Responsibility.
The proposal suggests that changes be adopted in some 20 significant areas, including client consent, confidentiality, conflicts, client file, and material and public statements by prosecutors.
• TBA President's Letter on Proposed Amendments to Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
(June 27, 2008, PDF file, 2 pages)
• Chair's Memo on Proposed Amendments to Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
(June 3, 2008, PDF file, 4 pages)
• Proposed Amendments to Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
(June 3, 2008, draft; redlined to current rules) (206 pages in PDF format)
• Proposed Amendments to Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
(June 3, 2008, draft; redlined to current rules) (203 pages in Word format)
• Proposed Amendments to Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
(June 3, 2008, draft; redlined to ABA Model Rules) (194 pages in PDF format)
• TBA Petition for Pro Bono Rule Reform (including amendments to TRPC 6.1, 5.5 and 6.5; filed with Tennessee Supreme Court June 27, 2008)
Exhibit A — Rule 6.5
Exhibit B — Rule 5.5
Exhibit C — Rule 6.1
• TBA Petition for MJP Rules Reform (including amendments to TRPC 5.5 and 8.5; filed with Tennessee Supreme Court June 27, 2008)
|
|
Current Tennessee Rules
Of Professional Conduct (TRPC)
(Including amendments through Jan. 1, 2008)
|
The Tennessee Supreme Court approved new Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct (TRPC) for attorneys practicing in this state on Aug. 27, 2002. The rules first went into effect on March 1, 2003. The latest edition includes amendments through Jan. 1, 2008.
|
|
Download the rules or view them online now
As a service to the Tennessee legal community, the TBA is offering the full text of the Rules and Comments of the new Rules in PDF format that you may download to your computer or view online.
Request a printed 2008 version for your office
Printed copies of the newly updated 2008 rules booklet may be ordered for $15, including shipping costs, by visiting the online TBA Bookstore. or by contacting the TBA office at (800) 899-6993 or in Nashville (615) 383-7421. Discounts for bulk orders are also available.
|
The adoption of the TRPC was the culmination of seven years of work on the revision of Tennessee's lawyer ethics rules led by the TBA's Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Hundreds of Tennessee attorneys and judges were involved in the process, offering comments, suggestions, and revisions and the Supreme Court spent almost two years soliciting and receiving comments, holding oral argument, and considering the proposed revisions.
|
|
