Utah Sup. Ct. R. Prof'l. Prac. 8.4
It is professional misconduct for a licensed paralegal practitioner to:
Utah. Sup. Ct. R. Prof'l. Prac. 8.4
Comment
[1] Licensed paralegal practitioners are subject to discipline when they violate or attempt to violate the Licensed Paralegal Practitioner Rules of Professional Conduct or knowingly assist or induce another to do so through the acts of another, as when they request or instruct an agent to do so on the licensed paralegal practitioner's behalf. Paragraph (a), however, does not prohibit a licensed paralegal practitioner from advising a client concerning action the client is legally entitled to take.
[1a] A violation of paragraph (a) based solely on the licensed paralegal practitioner's violation of another of the Licensed Paralegal Practitioner Rules of Professional Conduct shall not be charged as a separate violation. However, this rule defines professional misconduct as a violation of the Licensed Paralegal Practitioner Rules of Professional Conduct as the term professional misconduct is used in the Supreme Court Rules of Professional Practice, including the Standards for Imposing Licensed Paralegal Practitioner Sanctions. In this respect, if a licensed paralegal practitioner violates any of the Licensed Paralegal Practitioner Rules of Professional Conduct, the appropriate discipline may be imposed pursuant to Rule 15-605.
[2] Many kinds of illegal conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law, such as offenses involving fraud and the offense of willful failure to file an income tax return. However, some kinds of offenses carry no such implication. Traditionally, the distinction was drawn in terms of offenses involving "moral turpitude." That concept can be construed to include offenses concerning some matters of personal morality, such as adultery and comparable offenses, that have no specific connection to fitness for the practice of law. Although a licensed paralegal practitioner is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a licensed paralegal practitioner should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust or serious interference with the administration of justice are in that category. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation.
[3] A licensed paralegal practitioner who, in the course of representing a client, knowingly manifests by words or conduct bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, violates paragraph (d) when such actions are prejudicial to the administration of justice. Legitimate advocacy respecting the foregoing factors does not violate paragraph (d).
[3a] The Standards of Licensed Paralegal Practitioner Professionalism and Civility approved by the Utah Supreme Court are intended to improve the administration of justice. An egregious violation or a pattern of repeated violations of the Standards of Licensed Paralegal Practitioner Professionalism and Civility may support a finding that the licensed paralegal practitioner has violated paragraph (d).
[4] A licensed paralegal practitioner may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists.
[5] Licensed paralegal practitioners holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A licensed paralegal practitioner's abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of licensed paralegal practitioners. The same is true of abuse of positions of private trust such as trustee, executor, administrator, guardian, agent and officer, director or manager of a corporation or other organization.