New Lawyer Ethics Code Now in Effect in New York

A new code of conduct for attorneys went into effect yesterday in New York.  Be aware of the changes.

This Law.com article summarizes some of the changes.  From the article:

Differences between the old code and the new rules largely concern the more expansive definitions provided in the new guidelines, according to Krane.

For instance, the new code declares that conflict waivers must be the product of informed consent confirmed in writing. "Informed consent," "confirmed in writing" and "writing" are all defined in the new rules, Krane noted...

Professor Stephen Gillers of New York University School of Law said another major change is the abandonment of the way the code treated instances where lawyers discovered that their clients had provided false information to a court or another tribunal. The expiring code treats disclosure of confidential information by the lawyer, even to correct a wrong against another party in litigation, as a violation of attorney-client privilege.

Under the new rules, the state has adopted the ABA model rules provision that a lawyer is required to disclose a false representation by a client, either intentional or unintentional, to the court in any criminal or civil matter.

Comments

[Joel Irving]

"Under the new rules, the state has adopted the ABA model rules provision that a lawyer is required to disclose a false representation by a client, either intentional or unintentional, to the court in any criminal or civil matter."

This new rule makes it easier for a corrupt lawyer to sabotage his clients civil or criminal case.

[Joel Irving]

"Under the new rules, the state has adopted the ABA model rules provision that a lawyer is required to disclose a false representation by a client, either intentional or unintentional, to the court in any criminal or civil matter."

This new rule makes it easier for a corrupt lawyer to sabotage his clients civil or criminal case.

How would the judge know for sure that the attorney was not fabricating a lie against his client so that he/she could get away with profiting from a conflict of interest from the other side?