The case at hand involves Jack Starr, a paralegal who should be called as a witness to a case. Jack has conducted several witness interviews, case research, and document review in the most important murder case in the firm. However, in order to work on the case, one should understand the limits of paralegal confidentiality in New York. The first argument is that a paralegal is not a lawyer. Therefore, the argument could be that the attorney-client privilege and ethical obligations only apply to lawyers. Jack Starr may not be under any legal obligation not to disclose any confidential information. However, a close analysis of the New York's Rules of Professional Conduct shows that paralegals should act in a way that is compatible with the professional obligations of a lawyer.
The other side of the argument is that attorney-client privilege and ethical obligations of client confidentiality usually extends to the paralegal and all non-lawyers that work under the lawyer. This point of view is supported by Rule 5.3 of the New York's Rules of Professional Conduct which notes that law firm shall ensure that the work of nonlawyers that work for the firm is adequately supervised. “A lawyer with direct supervisory authority over a nonlawyer shall adequately supervise the work of the nonlawyer, appropriate” (“New York's Rules of Professional Conduct”, 2017). This phrase “as appropriate” means that the lawyer should make reasonable effort to make sure that the conduct of the paralegal is compatible with the professional obligations of a lawyer.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Lawyers should thus act to implement policies that will protect client information and should be ready to train their paralegals regarding the importance of client confidentiality. The obligation of confidentiality usually extends to different types of client information such as files, documents, and even computer security. Confidential information could be defined as information that was gathering throughout the time of representing the client. The information can be treated as confidential if it is protected by attorney-client privilege, is likely to be embarrassing or detrimental to the case after it has been disclosed, or the information can be treated as confidential. However, confidential information will not include a lawyer’s legal knowledge or legal research or information that is generally known to the local community or profession which the information relates (“New York's Rules of Professional Conduct”, 2017). While Jack Starr may testify, he may be required to retain any piece of information that could be considered confidential. This will ensure that he acts in an ethical manner.
One example of a case regarding paralegal confidentiality was in the case court case of Vethan Law Firm and Wright, a paralegal. Wright had previously worked as a paralegal for The Vethan Law Firm represents Turner in a suit against Lopez, who is represented by Cweren. Wright was dismissed and later hired by Cweren and was involved with the case. After Cweren learned about Wright’s involvement, they barred her from viewing any Turner files and shifted the responsibility to other paralegals in order for Turner to maintain confidentiality. However, Vethan moved to disqualify Cweren but were unsuccessful because Wright maintained the confidential information when working with the case (“In Re Turner (Per Curiam)”, 2017). The case provides an example of the need to maintain confidential information among lawyers, paralegals, and nonlawyers.
In conclusion, as a paralegal, Jack Star is not a lawyer and is thus not under any legal obligation to provide abide by confidentiality agreements required by lawyers. However, care should be taken regarding confidential information that is shared. Jack Starr works and is supervised by a lawyer. It is thus the role of the lawyer to ensure that everyone in the firm acts in a way to ensure that there is a protection of confidential information. Paralegals are also required to act in an ethical manner so as to protect the confidentiality of the clients.
References
“ In Re Turner (Per Curiam)”. (2017). Supreme Court of Texas Decisions- Per Curiam. Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/cases/texas/supreme-court/2017/17-0099.html
“ New York's Rules of Professional Conduct”. (2017). New York State Unified Court System Part 1200 Rules of Professional Conduct. The New York State Bar Association.
