skip navigation
search

End-of-life notice: American Legal Ethics Library

As of March 1, 2013, the Legal Information Institute is no longer maintaining the information in the American Legal Ethics Library. It is no longer possible for us to maintain it at a level of completeness and accuracy given its staffing needs. It is very possible that we will revive it at a future time. At this point, it is in need of a complete technological renovation and reworking of the "correspondent firm" model which successfully sustained it for many years.

Many people have contributed time and effort to the project over the years, and we would like to thank them. In particular, Roger Cramton and Peter Martin not only conceived ALEL but gave much of their own labor to it. We are also grateful to Brad Wendel for his editorial contributions, to Brian Toohey and all at Jones Day for their efforts, and to all of our correspondents and contributors. Thank you.

We regret any inconvenience.

Some portions of the collection may already be severely out of date, so please be cautious in your use of this material.


Maryland Legal Ethics

1.12   Rule 1.12 Former Judge or Arbitrator

1.12:100   Comparative Analysis of Maryland Rule

Primary Maryland References: MD Rule 1.12
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.12, Other Jurisdictions
Commentary:

1.12:101      Model Rule Comparison

There are no substantive differences between Maryland Rule 1.12 and MR 1.12. The comment; MR 1.12, cmt. sections accompanying each Rule are identical.

1.12:102      Model Code Comparison

Paragraph (a) is substantially similar to DR 9-101(A), which provides that "a lawyer shall not accept employment in a matter upon the merits of which he has acted in a judicial capacity." Paragraph (a) differs, however, in that it is broader in scope and states more specifically the persons to whom it applies. There is no counterpart in the Model Code to paragraphs (b), (c), or (d).

With regard to arbitrators, EC 5-20 states that "a lawyer [who] has undertaken to act as an impartial arbitrator or mediator . . . should not thereafter represent in the dispute any of the parties involved." DR 9-101(A) does not provide a waiver of the disqualification applied to former judges by consent of the parties. However, DR 5-105(C) is similar in effect and could be construed to permit waiver.

1.12:200   Former Judge or Arbitrator Representing Client in Same Matter

Primary Maryland References: MD Rule 1.12(a)
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.12(a), Other Jurisdictions
Commentary: ABA/BNA 91.4501

This section has not yet been completed.

1.12:300   Negotiating for Future Employment

Primary Maryland References: MD Rule 1.12(b)
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.12(b), Other Jurisdictions
Commentary: ABA/BNA 91:4001, ALI-LGL 206, Wolfram 8.10

This section has not yet been completed.

1.12:400   Screening to Prevent Imputed Disqualification

Primary Maryland References: MD Rule 1.12(c)
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.12(c), Other Jurisdictions
Commentary: ABA/BNA 91:4501, ALI-LGL 203, 204, Wolfram 7.6.4

This section has not yet been completed.

1.12:500   Partisan Arbitrators Selected by Parties to Dispute

Primary Maryland References: MD Rule 1.12(d)
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.12(d), Other Jurisdictions
Commentary: ABA/BNA 51:1501

This section has not yet been completed.

Copyright
About us
Send email