Recently, a colleague’s comments about an appeal raised red flags regarding ethics in appellate representation. Developments after the appeal was taken had mooted the case. The colleague—a seasoned public interest attorney—observed that he could invoke an exception to the mootness doctrine so that there might be review of an important issue his office cared about.

            “But what does the client want?” counsel was asked. My colleague said that he assumed that the client would still want to seek an appellate decision declaring that what the trial court did was wrong. That triggered discussions among several other colleagues about the duty to represent a client, not pursue a cause.