The South Carolina Bar Ethics Advisory Committee provides the full text of all ethics opinions since 1990 online. To find the opinion you need, simply use the search form below.
The opinions in this database contain the advice of the Committee based on the state of the law at the time of each opinion. Opinions are not updated to reflect changes in the Rules of Professional Conduct, more recent opinions, or other law. Further research may be necessary. Earlier opinions are available through vLex Fastcase.
Frequently Asked Questions are also available.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-23
Pursuant to Rule 1.6(b)(2) of the South Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct, Attorney A would be allowed to disclose confidential information.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-21
The second attorney, being aware of the contingency agreement with the first attorney, has an obligation to determine what, if any, amount is owed under the contingency fee arrangement upon termination.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-20
A lawyer who knows his or her client has made a valid assignment of litigation proceeds to a medical care provider may not ethically ignore the assignee's rights and pay the assigned funds to the assignor-client.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-19
This question cannot be answered on the sparse facts presented. However, Rule 1.9 does provide guidelines and considerations that should be given prior to undertaking such representation.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-18
A lawyer for a governmental agency who knows that an employee of the organization is engaged in action or intends to commit an act which is a violation of law which might reasonably be imputed to the organization and is likely to result in substantial injury to the organization, shall proceed as is reasonably necessary in the best interest of the organization.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-17
Neither Lawyer A nor members of Lawyer A's firm should represent a defendant or a Guardian ad Litem in SCDSS cases, whether appointed or retained, in other counties.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-15
Rule 1.9 prohibits the representation of H by Law Office A.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-14
Since Lawyer 1 has a conflict of interest that requires his withdraw from representation of grandmother, the disqualification is imputed to his law partner, Lawyer 2, and Lawyer 2 is prohibited from representing the minor in related litigation unless the grandmother consents to the law firm's subsequent representation of the minor.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-13
An attorney formerly represented a husband in an action regarding the custody of children born before his current marriage. The husband's current wife is in prison. Family Court has appointed a member of this attorney's law office to represent the current wife in a divorce action.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-12
The ethical rules do not prohibit the attorney's complying with the judge's request. The attorney is under no obligation to notify the parties under Rule 8.4(g) as this is the judge's responsibility under 3(A)(4) of the Code of Judicial Conduct.