道德意见336
澳博app作为法院指定的无行为能力个人监护人的受托角色
A lawyer who has been appointed as a guardian of an incapacitated individual (but who is not acting as an attorney for the incapacitated individual) must not knowingly 向法庭对重要事实或法律作虚假陈述 or otherwise engage in conduct involving dishonesty 或歪曲. 作为监护人的澳博app，协助无行为能力的个人获得政府福利, but then subsequently learns that the incapacitated individual’s true identity is not as it has been represented may well be required under applicable law to disclose the correct information. 此外, a lawyer who receives information clearly establishing that a fraud has been perpetrated on a tribunal must reveal the fraud; there is no duty of confidentiality imposed by the 职业行为准则 that would prevent the lawyer acting solely as a guardian from making such a disclosure.
适用的规则
- 3.3(对法庭的坦诚)
- 8.4(行为)
调查
初学的, 哥伦比亚特区澳博app协会的会员, has been appointed by the Probate Division of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia to serve as a “permanent general guardian[]” of an incapacitated individual, 行使D . 1所规定的权力和职责.C. 法典§21-2047.1 他要求委员会就如何着手处理下列一系列事实提供指导. 在询问者被委任为无行为能力个人的监护人之前, 这名丧失行为能力的人中风，导致他部分瘫痪，需要住院治疗. 入院时，他出示了姓名和社会保险号码. 法院是在假定姓名和社会安全号码是合法的情况下采取行动的. 询问者已明确确定，无行为能力的个人的身份是假的, 但他无法确定丧失行为能力的人的真实身份. 这个无行为能力的人是移民, 但询问者一直无法确定他的状况，也无法找到任何家庭成员. 据推测，他无家可归，病得很重，不能照顾自己. 他完全没有语言能力，无法书写或理解交流.
在得知这个人的身份是假的之前, 初学的 used the social security number and other identifying information the incapacitated individual provided to obtain Medicaid and social security benefits and to place the incapacitated individual in a nursing home.2 根据D.C. 法典§21-2047, 初学的, 作为监护人, 有照顾的责任吗, 监护权, 以及对无行为能力个体的控制, 包括, 在其他职责中, discretion to take appropriate action to compel performance by any person of a duty to support the incapacitated individual and pay sums for his welfare; an obligation to maintain sufficient contact with the incapacitated individual to know the incapacitated individual’s capacities, 限制, 需要, 机会, and physical and mental health; an obligation to take care of the incapacitated individual’s personal effects; and an obligation to conserve any excess money for the incapacitated individual’s future 需要. (在这种情况下, 唯一有争议的资金是那些无行为能力的个人从政府援助项目中获得的资金。. 询问者已确定该无行为能力的个人不能安全地从护养院出院.
初学的 seeks guidance on how to resolve an apparent conflict between his duties under the District of Columbia 职业行为准则 (“规则”) and the District of Columbia guardianship statute. 特别是, 初学的 wants to know whether he may continue to use the name that the incapacitated individual has been using; whether he has any affirmative duty to disclose information about the incapacitated individual’s false identity to third parties; and whether he must follow the District of Columbia guardianship laws or the 规则 whenever a conflict between them arises.
讨论
根据我们对调查事实的了解, 询问者不作为无行为能力个人的澳博app. 而, 询问者拥有他被任命时所依据的监护规约所列举的法定权力和职责.3 此外, 询问者没有表明在个人丧失行为能力之前存在澳博app-委托人关系.
We believe the fact that the incapacitated individual has never had the ability to communicate with 初学的 or participate in decisions about his welfare supports the conclusion that no lawyer-client relationship has been formed. 正如美国澳博app协会道德与职业责任常设委员会所指出的那样, “客户-澳博app关系”假定客户和澳博app之间可以进行有效的沟通, 而客户, 在咨询了澳博app之后, 能否就代表的目标和实现这些目标的手段作出深思熟虑的决定.ABA正式版. 96-404 (1996); 另请参阅 NC酒吧正式道德规范Op. (被指定为监护人的澳博app 诉讼代理人 for a parent with diminished capacity in a Termination of Parental Rights action does not have a lawyer-client relationship with the parent). 没有资料表明询问者与无行为能力的个人之间曾经存在过这种关系, 我们认为，得出不存在这种关系的结论是合理的.
Certain 职业行为准则 are applicable to 初学的’s conduct notwithstanding the fact that 初学的 is not acting as the incapacitated individual’s counsel. 虽然有些规则只适用于客户-澳博app关系已经形成的情况， 看,e.g., 规则1.2; 1.6; 1.16, 其他条款适用于澳博app协会成员，无论他们是否从事专业活动. 具体来说,维.C. 规则3.3(a)(1), 3.3(d)，和8.(c)约束询问者的行为, 即使他没有作为无行为能力个人的澳博app.
规则3.第3(a)(1)条规定向法庭坦白，规定“澳博app不得明知 . . . 向法庭对重要事实或法律作虚假陈述.对规则3的评论[2].第3条规定, “在某些情况下，不披露可能等同于肯定的失实陈述.规则三.3(d) provides in pertinent part that “[a] lawyer who receives information clearly establishing that a fraud has been perpetrated upon the tribunal shall promptly reveal the fraud to the tribunal unless compliance with this duty would require disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.在这种情况下，澳博app应当及时要求委托人纠正欺诈行为.”4 规则8.第4(c)条规定:“澳博app……是职业上的不端行为。 . . 从事涉及不诚实、欺诈、欺骗或虚假陈述的行为.”
《澳博app下载网》将“法庭”广义地定义为包括作出司法或准司法性质决定的监管机构, 不论诉讼程序的正式或非正式程度. D.C. 规则、术语. 相应的, 如果询问者, 履行他作为监护人的职责, 认为有必要出席确定福利权利的机构的听证会, 规则3.第3(a)(1)条适用于询问者在该审裁处的行为.
初学的 is obligated under the guardianship statute to “report in writing the condition of the ward and of the incapacitated individual’s estate . . . 至少半年一次.” D.C. 法典§21-2047. 即使没有发现无行为能力的个人具有实施欺诈或犯罪所必需的精神状态, 询问者已获得“确凿”证据，证明该无行为能力的个人并非他所声称的那样. 因此，询问者有“向法庭揭露欺诈行为”的肯定义务.” D.C. 规则3.3(d). 事实上, withholding the fact that the incapacitated individual had obtained benefits using a false name and social security number would likely constitute a “circumstance[] where the failure to make a disclosure is the equivalent of an affirmative misrepresentation.” D.C. 规则3.3、评论[2].
是否出庭受审, 完成文书工作以继续享受福利, 证明无行为能力个人的监护权, 或者兑现无行为能力个人的福利支票, 询问者必须, 在任何时候, 符合规则8的要求.第4(c)条，禁止涉及不诚实、欺诈、欺骗或虚假陈述的行为. 实际上，询问者依赖或以其他方式使用他明知是虚假的信息的任何行为都将构成不诚实, 欺骗, 或歪曲, 即使这种行为在法律上不属于欺诈.
结论
初学的 may not continue to use the name that the incapacitated individual is using; we believe that failure to disclose the false identity would be the equivalent of misrepresentation. 这件事在哥伦比亚特区监护法和职业行为规则之间没有冲突.
批准日期:2006年5月
出版日期:2006年9月
1. 根据1986年《澳博app》原任命令签发的监护书, 9月30日生效, 1989.
2. 从调查中不清楚无行为能力的个人最初向谁提供了这一信息. 询问者说，他推测此人“借用”了身份信息.
3. Appointment of a lawyer 作为监护人 for an incapacitated individual does not create an attorney-client relationship where none existed previously, 根据哥伦比亚特区法规，监护人不需要是澳博app. 看到维.C. 法典§21-2043, 其中订明“任何合资格人士均可被委任为无行为能力人士的监护人?.“规约还将合格配偶列为优先考虑的监护人选, 成年子女, 父母, and relatives of the incapacitated individual; it does include a prerequisite that a guardian be qualified to serve as counsel for the incapacitated individual or any requirement that a guardian serve as counsel. 这与由澳博app担任诉讼监护人的情况不同. 在D.C. 道德Op. 295 (2000), we concluded that a lawyer appointed as a guardian 诉讼代理人 in a child abuse and neglect proceeding is properly considered to be the child’s lawyer.
4. Whether or not the incapacitated individual committed fraud when originally presenting his false identity – a question that we have no occasion to address here – 初学的 has received “information clearly establishing that a fraud has been perpetrated upon the tribunal,我必须, 因此, 向仲裁庭披露欺诈行为，除非披露会违反规则1.6. 然而，正如我们上面所解释的，规则1.第6条不适用于此，因为无行为能力的个人不是询问者的客户.
