The attorney-client privilege was always considered one of the strongest privileges under the law, but this modern world has seen a certain sense of some people who are not carefully complying with the requirements of confidentiality. Why isn’t something being done?

There is no question that attorney-client confidentiality is more at risk. The Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct, under Rule 1.6, establish a confidentiality standard. It goes far beyond the old confidence and secrets of the statutory and common law attorney-client privilege. Confidentiality under the regulatory rules applies to anything pertaining to the representation. That means, even information that is public somewhere, but not known, generally cannot be revealed by the lawyer. Some lawyers do not understand the extent of confidentiality under Rule 1.6. For instance, if a client has an arrest in another state or a conviction which is not known in Pennsylvania, the lawyer, without the client’s consent, cannot reveal it. Now, if the lawyer is asked directly by the district attorney or the Judge if there is any other conviction some place, the lawyer has a choice. The lawyer can tell the truth (with the consent of the client) or the lawyer will have to assert the attorney-client privilege, which obviously provides the answer indirectly.