020522 SCBEO, ETH 22-01

• Case Date: February 05, 2022
• Court: South Carolina

ETH 22-01 Ethics Advisory Opinion 22-01 South Carolina Bar Ethics Opinion Ethics Advisory Opinion February 5, 2022          UPON THE REQUEST OF A MEMBER OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA BAR, THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS RENDERED THIS OPINION ON THE ETHICAL PROPRIETY OF THE INQUIRER’S CONTEMPLATED CONDUCT. THIS COMMITTEE HAS NO DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY. LAWYER DISCIPLINE IS ADMINISTERED SOLELY BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT THROUGH ITS COMMISSION ON LAWYER CONDUCT.          SC Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.18.          Facts: Lawyer receives an unsolicited email message from an individual (the “Sender”) with whom lawyer has no prior relationship. The unsolicited email message is captioned “Land Title Dispute”, requests the lawyer’s “legal insight on a real estate situation”, and includes a description of the underlying facts together with an inquiry as to the lawyer’s opinion about whether the Sender has “a legitimate claim” based on the recited facts.          Lawyer quickly realizes that the facts recited in the unsolicited email message relate to a matter in which the lawyer and a client of the lawyer have adverse interests to those of the Sender. By email reply, Lawyer promptly informs the Sender of those adverse interests and informs the Sender “that I cannot represent you”. Lawyer goes on to write, “Please let me know if and when you are represented by other counsel and I will [be] happy to communicate with them regarding this matter.” Lawyer also takes the opportunity to inform the Sender that Lawyer believes the Sender’s “proposal to profit off of this mistake is both theft and fraud”. The Sender responds via email reply taking exception to Lawyer’s characterization of the Sender’s position.          Question Presented: Does Lawyer have an ethical obligation to maintain the confidentiality of the information provided by the Sender since it was provided in the course of seeking legal advice?          Summary: No, Lawyer has no ethical obligation to maintain the confidentiality of the information provided by the Sender.          Opinion: It is clear from the facts that the Sender is neither a current client...