Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
The authority granted to Congress to organize, arm, and discipline the militia while reserving to the states the appointment of officers and the power to train the militia according to rules prescribed by Congress.
The authority granted to Congress to organize, arm, and discipline the militia while reserving to the states the appointment of officers and the power to train the militia according to rules prescribed by Congress.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Punishment or sanctions imposed by a professional body on a lawyer who has breached a rule of professional ethics, including disbarment, suspension, and reprimand.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Punishment or sanctions imposed by a professional body on a lawyer who has breached a rule of professional ethics, including disbarment, suspension, and reprimand.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Congress passes a statute setting uniform training standards for state militias during federal service. State officials in one jurisdiction resist the standards and claim exclusive control over militia training. The federal law is upheld because Article I grants Congress the power to prescribe the discipline for the militia when employed in United States service.
Dominic Drake, licensed in two states, gives tax advice from his home office that primarily affects clients in a neighboring jurisdiction. When a disciplinary complaint arises, the home state applies its own rules after determining that the predominant effect of the conduct occurred there. Drake avoids discipline because his conduct conformed to the rules of the jurisdiction he reasonably believed would feel the predominant effect.
Dylan Duffy misses a filing deadline, causing his client to lose a claim. He pays the client from personal funds without disclosing the error or advising independent counsel. The state bar finds serious misconduct involving dishonesty and conflict of interest. Duffy receives suspension because the concealment and self-dealing elevate the matter beyond simple negligence.
Dolores Diaz miscalculates a statute of limitations, causing a client to lose a cause of action. The client sues for malpractice and recovers damages. The bar declines to impose discipline because a single negligent act, without gross unfitness, does not meet the threshold for professional sanctions.
Daphne Doyle, defending a high-profile client, comments to reporters about the case. The bar seeks discipline under a rule prohibiting statements with a substantial likelihood of material prejudice. The court dismisses the charge because the rule's vague safe-harbor language fails to give fair notice and chills protected speech.
Denise Donovan is convicted of willfully attempting to evade income taxes. The bar initiates proceedings based solely on the conviction. Donovan is suspended because the criminal conduct reflects adversely on honesty and fitness to practice, independent of the criminal sentence imposed.
Discipline addresses ethical violations that demonstrate unfitness to practice and protects the public and the profession. Malpractice compensates a client for harm caused by negligence. A single negligent act may support a malpractice recovery without triggering discipline unless the conduct is so gross that it shows unfitness.
Supporting sources
A lawyer is not subject to discipline if the conduct conforms to the rules of a jurisdiction in which the lawyer reasonably believes the predominant effect of the conduct will occur. This safe harbor prevents conflicting obligations when rules differ across states.
Supporting sources
Yes. A conviction for willfully attempting to evade income taxes constitutes criminal conduct that reflects adversely on honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer. Discipline may proceed independently of the criminal sentence.
Supporting sources
Yes. Discipline for press statements is constrained by the First Amendment. A rule prohibiting statements with a substantial likelihood of material prejudice is permissible in principle, but vague safe-harbor language can render the rule unconstitutionally vague and unenforceable.
Supporting sources