State bar act, by-laws, rules of procedure relative to disbarment, discipline and reinstatement, rules of professional conduct, canons of judicial ethics. Issued February, 1936.

Mode of access: Internet.

Rules of gentlemanly conduct /

"March 1983."

Integrating ‘role play’ in assessment to strengthen professional conduct and accountability of students : a pilot study

BACKGROUND In a process engineering setting, graduates are frequently allocated reviews of existing operations or required to scope new production processes by their supervisors with a view to improving or expanding on operations and overall productivity. These tasks may be carried out in teams and in consultation with the process engineer’s immediate line manager or a more experienced engineer, such as the Production or Maintenance Manager; ultimately reporting to senior management, which is frequently a non-engineer. Although professional skills development is part of engineering curricula, ‘professional conduct’ and ‘accountability’ required for dealing with peers and superiors in industry is not very well addressed at university. Consequently, upon graduation, many students are, in terms of knowledge and experience in this area, underprepared to work effectively in industry settings. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to develop and implement a role-play scenario within a core 2nd year process engineering unit, so that students could gain knowledge, skills and experience in different aspects (and nuances) of professional conduct and accountability. DESIGN/METHOD In the role-play scenario, students worked in ‘engineering production teams’ to design a process for an iconic Queensland fruitcake and to present their solution and recommendations (culminating in a poster presentation) to an assessment panel consisting of staff, role-playing as, ‘production and plant managers’. Students were assessed on several areas, including professionalism using a criteria referenced assessment guide by a 3-member cross-disciplinary staff panel consisting of a Business Faculty lecturer, an engineer from industry and the lecturer of the Process Engineering unit. Professional conduct and accountability was gauged through direct questioning by the panel. Feedback was also sought from students on various aspects through a survey questionnaire after the role play activity at the end of semester. RESULTS Overall, the role play was very well performed with students achieving an average score of 79.3/100 (distinction grade). Professional conduct as assessed by panel was on average better than scores given for professional accountability (4.0 compared with 3.6 out of 5). Feedback from students indicated that the learning activities had contributed to their overall understanding of the content and the role of process engineers. Industry involvement was rated very highly as contributing to their learning at 4.8 (on Likert scale from 1 – 5) and the poster presentation was rated at 3.6. CONCLUSIONS This pilot study was successful in implementing a new assessment task for modelling professional conduct and accountability within a 2nd year core unit. This task incorporated a role-play activity and there was evidence to suggest that this and associated learning tasks were successful in broadening students’ understanding and skills in this area required for engineering practice. Following feedback given by students and staff, improvements will be made to the nature of the problem, how it is defined, its assessment, and the approach taken in the role-play scenario when the unit is offered in 2014.

Representing Clients in the Marijuana Industry: Navigating State and Federal Rules

As the number of states legalizing medicinal and recreational marijuana increases and marijuana emerges as a growing lawful industry, lawyers find themselves in an awkward position. In most states, lawyers who represent clients in the marijuana industry risk discipline for assisting clients in the commission of a (federal) crime. Even in jurisdictions like Colorado, where the rules of professional conduct have been amended to permit lawyers to assist clients who comply with marijuana state laws, lawyers who are admitted to practice in federal courts risk being disciplined by these tribunals for assisting clients in the commission of a crime pursuant to the courts’ local rules of conduct. This short article explores the thorny issue of navigating state and federal rules of professional conduct while representing clients in the marijuana industry.

Éthique et gouvernance : les règles qui régissent la prévention et la sanction des conflits d'intérêts chez les élus municipaux

RÉSUMÉ FRANÇAIS Ce mémoire fait l’étude du régime de prévention et de sanction des conflits possibles entre les intérêts de la municipalité d’une part et de ceux de ses élus de l’autre. L’objet de recherche est abordé selon une approche historique et éthique basée sur le régime juridique actuel. Le mémoire est divisé en 3 chapitres : (1) la notion de conflit d’intérêts ; (2) le cadre juridique à la base du régime de sanction des conflits d’intérêts et (3) celui sur le régime de prévention des conflits d’intérêts dans le domaine municipal. Le chapitre préliminaire situe l’objet de recherche à l’intérieur des grandes tendances de la recherche juridique sur la question et présente un cadre de réflexion sur la notion de conflit d’intérêts. L’examen des conflits d’intérêts repose avant tout sur un questionnement et sur un jugement de nature subjective : ce qui a été considéré comme un conflit d’intérêts autrefois ne l’est pas nécessairement de nos jours et ce, en dépit du fait que le cadre juridique évolue aussi dans le temps. On ne peut donc pas dégager avec exactitude et pour toujours ce qui constitue un conflit d’intérêts de ce qui n’en constitue pas un. Le chapitre premier est divisé en 4 sections. On y traite notamment de la règle relative à l’interdiction pour un élu municipal de contracter avec la municipalité. On y démontre que l’origine de cette règle remonte aux premières lois municipales du XIXe siècle et que cette dernière a subi assez peu de modifications au fil des ans. La troisième section porte sur les cas de malversation, d’abus de confiance et les autres inconduites prohibées par la Loi sur les élections et référendums dans les municipalités (L.R.Q. c. E-2.2). Une quatrième section sur les accusations criminelles d’abus de confiance et de corruption vient clore le premier chapitre. Chacune de ces sections est abordée notamment en faisant l’historique des dispositions législatives en cause ainsi qu’en faisant certains parallèles avec la législation des autres provinces canadiennes. Le chapitre 2 sur le régime de prévention des conflits d’intérêts est divisé en 4 parties. La première section porte sur l’obligation pour un élu de déclarer annuellement ses intérêts pécuniaires. Cette obligation n’est pas unique au Québec puisqu’elle est présente dans quelques législations provinciales canadiennes. La deuxième section porte sur l’obligation pour cet élu de dénoncer verbalement son intérêt dans une question abordée par le conseil municipal réuni en séance ou en comité. Là encore, l’origine de cette approche préventive est fort ancienne et a longtemps été considéré comme le seul moyen de dénoncer son intérêt sans subir les sanctions prévues par la loi. Une troisième section s’intéresse au cadre juridique entourant les soumissions publiques et qui vise à éliminer toute situation possible de favoritisme ou de patronage. Une quatrième section aborde la question des codes d’éthique et de leur utilité ainsi que les développements récents sur cette question avec le dépôt en 2009 du rapport du Groupe de travail sur l’éthique dans le milieu municipal. Une conclusion vient clore le mémoire en présentant une synthèse de l’étude assortie de commentaires personnels sur les conclusions du Groupe de travail précité.

Public Lawyers and Marijuana Regulation

Although 23 states and the District of Columbia have now legalized marijuana for medical purposes, marijuana remains a prohibited substance under federal law. Because the production, sale, possession and use of marijuana remain illegal, there is a risk of prosecution under federal laws. Furthermore, those who help marijuana users and providers put themselves at risk — federal law punishes not only those who violate drug laws but also those who assist or conspire with them to do so. In the case of lawyers representing marijuana users and businesspeople, this means not only the real (though remote) risk of criminal prosecution but also the more immediate risk of professional discipline. Elsewhere, we wrote about the difficult place in which lawyers find themselves when representing marijuana clients. We argued that while both the criminal law and the rules of professional conduct rightly require legal obedience from lawyers, other countervailing factors must be considered when evaluating lawyers’ representation of marijuana clients. In particular, we asserted that considerations of equity and access to justice weigh dispositively in favor of protecting lawyers who endeavor to help their clients comply with state marijuana laws, and we suggested means of interpreting relevant criminal law provisions and rules of professional conduct to achieve this result. This article builds on that analysis, taking on the particular issue of the public lawyer’s’ role in marijuana regulation. For government lawyers, the key issues in exercising discretion in the context of marijuana are not clients’ access to the law and equality but rather determining the clients’ wishes and serving them diligently and ethically. Lawyers representing state agencies, legislatures and the executive branch of government draft and interpret the rules and regulations regarding marijuana. Lawyers for federal, state and local governments then interpret those rules to determine the obligations and responsibilities of those they represent and to help their clients meet those obligations and carry out their required tasks. Both state and federal prosecutors are charged with determining what conduct remains illegal under the new rules and, perhaps more importantly, with exercising discretion regarding whom to prosecute and to what extent. Marijuana regulation is not a niche area of government regulation; it will influence the practice of virtually every public lawyer in the years to come. Public lawyers must understand the changes in marijuana law and the implications for government clients. Given the pervasiveness of the modern regulatory state, the situation is no easier — and, in many ways, it is more complicated — for public lawyers than it is for private ones. Public lawyers face myriad practice challenges with respect to marijuana law reform, and while we do not purport to identify and resolve all of the issues that are sure to arise in this short paper, we hope that the article helps alert public lawyers to some of the risks involved in participating in marijuana regulation so that they can think carefully about their obligations when these issues arise.

In-House Risk

Over the last thirty years or so, as the number of in-house counsel rose and their role increased in scope and prominence, increased attention has been given the various challenges these lawyers face under the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, from figuring out who is the client the in-house lawyer represents, to navigating conflicts of interest, maintaining independence, and engaging in a multijurisdictional practice of law. Less attention, to date, has been given to business risk assessment, perhaps in part because that function appears to be part of in-house counsel’s role as a business person rather than as a lawyer. Overlooking the role of in-house counsel in assessing risk, however, is a risky proposition, because risk assessment constitutes for some in-house counsel a significant aspect of their role, a role that in turn informs and shapes how in-house counsel perform other more overtly legal tasks. For example, wearing her hat as General Counsel, a lawyer for the entity-client may opine and explain issues of compliance with the law. Wearing her hat as the Chief Legal Officer, however, the same lawyer may now be called upon as a member of business management to participate in the decision whether to comply with the law. After outlining some of the traditional challenges faced by in-house counsel under the Rules, this short essay explores risk assessment by in-house counsel and its impact on their role and function under the Rules. It argues that the key to in-house lawyers’ successful navigation of multiple roles, and, in particular, to their effective assessment of business risk is keen awareness of the various hats they are called upon to wear. Navigating these various roles may not be easy for lawyers, whose training and habits of mind often teach them to zoom in on legal risks to the exclusion of business risks. Indeed, law schools continue to teach law students “to think like a lawyer” and law firms, the historical breeding grounds for in-house counsel positions, in a world of increased specialization master the narrower contemplation of legal questions. Yet the present and future of in-house counsel practice demand of its practitioners the careful and gradual coming to terms, buildup and mastery of business risk analysis skills, alongside the cultivation of traditional legal risk analysis tools.

Rules of the Supreme Court of Illinois : admission, registration, professional conduct and discipline of attorneys and the code of judicial conduct.

Subtitle varies.

Indicative markers of leadership provided by ICT professional bodies in the promotion and support of ethical conduct

Most countries with a mature Information and Communications Technology (ICT industry have at least one professional body (PB) that claims to represent its members working with such technology. Other ICT PBs operate in the international arena. These PBs may differ in membership criteria, jurisdiction and even objectives but all profess to promote high ethical and professional standards. This study seeks to determine the common indicative markers that demonstrate that an ICT PB is offering leadership in identifying, promoting and supporting ethical conduct amongst a variety of constituencies including its own members and beyond. An extensive literature review identified over 200 prospective markers covering a broad range of potential activities of an ICT PB. These were grouped into nine major areas: ethical professional practice; continuous professional development; research and publication; education of future professionals; members’ career development; social obligations; professional engagement; preserving professional dignity/ reputation and regulation of the profession. These markers were arranged hierarchically in a word processing document referred to as a “marker template”. An analysis of selected ICT PBs websites was undertaken to confirm and refine the template. It will be used in the future for a comparative study of how professional bodies offer leadership to their various constituencies in the area of ethical conduct.

A delayed inheritance: The Medical Board of Victoria's 75-year wait to find doctors guilty of "infamous conduct in a professional respect"

The Medical Board of Victoria (Board) was created in 1844 to register “legally qualified medical practitioners”. It was not until 1933, however, that the Board attained the power to remove from its register a doctor who had engaged in “infamous conduct in a professional respect” (the power), even though the General Council of Medical Education and Registration of the United Kingdom on which the Board was modelled had been granted the power 75 years earlier. This article argues that the delay in the Board’s inheritance was attributable to successive Victorian Parliaments’ distrust of the Board and that this attitude was unwarranted, at least from early in the 20th century. The article maintains that the granting of the power to the Board was a crucial event in the history of the regulation of the Victorian medical profession. This is illustrated both by the difficulty encountered by the medical profession in dealing with doctors’ unethical conduct before 1933, and the Board’s concern to use its new authority responsibly and appropriately to protect the public and the profession in the three years after it attained the power.