A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
Comment
Comparison to former Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility
Rule 1.3 replaces both DR 6-101(A)(3) (a lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him) and DR 7-101(A)(1) (with limited exceptions, a lawyer shall not fail to seek the lawful objectives of his client through reasonably available means permitted by law and the disciplinary rules).
Neither Model Rule 1.3 nor any of the Model Rules on advocacy states a duty of "zealous representation." The reference to acting "with zeal in advocacy" is deleted from Comment [1] because "zeal" is often invoked as an excuse for unprofessional behavior. Despite the title of Canon 7 of the Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility and the content of EC 7-1, no disciplinary rule requires "zealous" advocacy. Moreover, the disciplinary rules recognize that courtesy and punctuality are not inconsistent with diligent representation [DR 6-101(A)(3) ], that a lawyer, where permissible, may exercise discretion to waive or fail to assert a right or position [DR 7-101(B)(1) ], and that a lawyer may refuse to aid or participate in conduct the lawyer believes to be unlawful, even though there is some support for an argument that it is lawful [DR 7-101(B)(2) ].
Comparison to ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct
There is no change to the text of Model Rule 1.3.
The reference in Comment [1] to a lawyer's use of "whatever lawful and ethical measures are required to vindicate a client's cause or endeavor" and the last three sentences of the comment have been stricken. The choice of means to accomplish the objectives of the representation are governed by the lawyer's professional discretion, and the lawyer's duty to communicate with the client, as specified in Rules 1.2(a) and 1.4(a)(2).
The reference to a lawyer's duty to act "with zeal in advocacy upon the client's behalf" also is deleted. Zealous advocacy is often invoked as an excuse for unprofessional behavior.
Comment [3] is revised to state more concisely the consequences of lawyer delay and neglect in handling a client matter and explain when charges of neglect are likely to be the subject of professional discipline.
The first sentence of Comment [4] is reworded and the balance of that sentence and the second sentence are deleted. The content of the deleted language is addressed in Rule 1.2.
Comment [5] is revised to refer to Gov. Bar R. V, Section 26. That rule authorizes Disciplinary Counsel or the chair of a certified grievance committee to appoint a lawyer to inventory client files and protect the interests of clients when a lawyer does not or cannot (because of suspension or death) attend to clients and no partner, executor, or other responsible party capable of conducting the lawyer's practice is available and willing to assume responsibility.
Ohio. R. Prof'l. Cond. 1.3