Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Conduct by a lawyer that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know constitutes harassment or discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, or socioeconomic status when the conduct relates to the practice of law. The prohibition preserves the lawyer's discretion to accept, decline, or withdraw from representations and does not bar legitimate advice or advocacy consistent with the rules.
Sources & Authorities· 1 primary source
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Model Codes
Hornbooks
How it applies
Common Examples
2
Stereotyping Remarks in Courthouse Hallway
Hunter Hughes, counsel for Harbor National Bank in a repossession suit, spoke with the court clerk and opposing counsel in the courthouse hallway after a discovery conference. Hughes referred to the plaintiff as a young Black man who probably had not read the contract and stated that people like him commonly default on loans. The remarks occurred during a conversation about the pending case and invoked racial and socioeconomic stereotypes about the opposing party.
Disability-Based Comments at Mediation
Hazel Hoffman represented a general contractor at a mediation over a subcontract dispute with a wheelchair-using subcontractor. Throughout the session Hoffman repeatedly called the subcontractor a liability, questioned whether someone that disabled could supervise a reliable crew, and described the operation as crippled. The statements were directed at the opposing party and the mediator to pressure settlement on the payment claim.
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
Does the prohibition require that the target of the comments be present or that the comments affect case outcome?+
No. The rule is violated when a lawyer engages in conduct the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is harassment or discrimination on a protected basis in conduct related to the practice of law. The target need not be present, no formal complaint is required, and the comments need not alter any procedural rights or litigation result.
Supporting sources
Does the rule apply only to statements made inside a courtroom or in formal filings?+
No. Conduct related to the practice of law includes conversations with court personnel and opposing counsel in courthouse hallways, mediation sessions, and other professional settings connected to client representation. Informal or off-the-record remarks still trigger the prohibition when they constitute harassment or discrimination on a protected basis.
Supporting sources
Does legitimate advocacy protect a lawyer who uses protected-characteristic stereotypes to pressure settlement?+
No. The rule expressly preserves legitimate advice and advocacy, but that carve-out does not authorize repeated derogatory references to an opposing party's disability, race, or other protected trait. Framing such comments as hard bargaining does not convert them into permissible advocacy.
Supporting sources
Is a lawyer subject to discipline for statements in a brief that rely on religious stereotypes without individualized evidence?+
Yes when the statements substitute protected-characteristic generalizations for case-specific facts in a filing that affects a party's professional opportunities. The rule reaches discriminatory advocacy in administrative proceedings even if the lawyer makes no direct personal attack on the individual.
Supporting sources
Professional ResponsibilityRegulation of the legal profession · Regulation after admission—lawyer disciplineMPREFoundational