Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Ohio Supreme Court proposes amendments to conduct rules

By Karen Rubin on September 18, 2014
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The Ohio Supreme Court will accept public comment until October 15 on proposed amendments to the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct and the Ohio Rules for the Government of the Bar.  Ohio becomes the latest state to consider incorporating some version of the Model Rule revisions that the ABA adopted in 2012 and 2013.

Here is a link to the announcement and to the complete language of the proposed amendments.

Proposed changes to confidentiality, solicitation rules

Proposed substantive amendments include:

  • Rule 1.1 (Competence) would add a comment addressing the duty to keep abreast of technology;
  • Rule 1.1 would also add a comment advising that outsourcing legal services should ordinarily require the client’s informed consent;
  • Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality) would require lawyers to make reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized disclosure of or access to information relating to the client’s representation;
  • Rule 1.6 would also allow lawyers changing employment to make a limited disclosure of confidential information in order to help detect and resolve conflicts of interest created by the move;
  • Rule 7.3 (Solicitation of Clients) would bar in-person, live telephone or real-time electronic solicitation of a minor, an incompetent person or a person the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is unlikely to be able to exercise reasonable judgment in employing a lawyer.  (This proposed new rule was not part of the ABA’s recent revisions to the Model Rules.)

Proposed change to firm insurance coverage requirements

In addition, a proposed amendment to Rule III to the Rules for the Government of the Bar would increase the level of professional liability insurance that LPA’s corporations, legal clinics, LLC’s and LPA’s must maintain.  The existing rule requires coverage of $50,000 per lawyer/per claim and $100,00 per lawyer in the aggregate.  The proposed rule would increase the level to $100,000 per lawyer/per claim and $300,000 per lawyer in the aggregate.

Comments should be submitted to:  Richard A. Dove, Secretary, Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline, Ohio Supreme Court, 65 S. Front St., Fifth Floor, Columbus, OH 43215 or to rick.dove@sc.ohio.gov.

Photo of Karen Rubin Karen Rubin

Karen is a member of Thompson Hine’s business litigation group. She is a member of the Ohio Supreme Court’s Commission on Professionalism, a former chair of the Certified Grievance Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, and a member and past chair of…

Karen is a member of Thompson Hine’s business litigation group. She is a member of the Ohio Supreme Court’s Commission on Professionalism, a former chair of the Certified Grievance Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, and a member and past chair of the Ohio State Bar Association’s Ethics Committee. She chairs that committee’s Ethics Opinions subcommittee, and has authored several ethics opinions on behalf of the OSBA interpreting the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct. Karen also is an adjunct professor at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, teaching legal ethics.

Read more about Karen RubinEmailKaren's Linkedin ProfileKaren's Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Ethics & Professional Responsibility
  • Blog:
    The Law for Lawyers Today
  • Organization:
    Thompson Hine LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo