A California attorney is required by statute to “maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself or herself to preserve the secrets, of his or her client.” Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6068(e)(1). This obligation is broader than just protecting attorney-client privileged communications, but requires California attorneys to protect all confidential client information, regardless of whether it is privileged.

This is in contrast to California’s ethics rules, which do not. See Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6068(e)(2). The LSNYC II court also noted that Section 509(h) contemplated the production of retainer agreements, which would capture much the same information as the names and problem codes.

Any exercise by an attorney of any constitutional or statutory privilege shall not be used against the attorney in a regulatory or disciplinary proceeding against him or her." Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6068(i) (West). Case 2:15-cv-02964-BRO-AJW Document 487 Filed 11/28/16 Page 12 of 31 Page ID #:14856 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7 to withdraw its "contempt" allegations, trying to hold the "contempt" charges as leverage to extract waivers and discloure of information to which the Magistrate Judge commented Hasbro is not entitled.

Clients seek representation on a confidential basis for a wide range ofreasons and a lawyer mustnot disclose the client’s identity withoutthe client’s informed consent. Cal. State Bar Standing Comm. on Prof’! Responsibility & Conduct, Formal Op. No. 2007-173 (“The client’s identity may ... be a client confidenceor secret protected by Business and Professions Code section 6068, subdivision (e) and rule 3- 100, or be deemed confidential information protected by the client’s Constitutional right of privacy.”); ABA Comm. on Ethics & Prof’! Responsibility, Informal Op. 1287 (1974) (“[T]he names, addresses and telephone numbersofclients of a Legal Services Office are secret within the meaning ofDR 4-101(A) since it might be an embarrassmentto the client for any numberofreasonsto haveit revealed that he wasa client ofthe Legal Services Office.”’). In this case, the Court of Appeal reasoned that the conflict waiver wasnot informed becauseit did not disclose to J-M Sheppard Mullin’s representation (whether prior or concurrent) of South Tahoe, by name, in an unrelated matter; instead, it contained general language allowing Sheppard Mullin to represent current or future clients adverse to J-M in unrelated matters.

The Business & Professions Code imposes a duty on attorneys “[n]Jot to encourage - either the commencementor the continuanceofan action or Nn proceeding from any corrupt motive ofpassion orinterest.” (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6068, subd. (g).) Similarly, rule 3-200(A)ofthe California Rules of Professional Conduct prohibits attorneys from - continuing employment whose objective is “[t]o bring an action, — conduct a defense,assert a position inlitigation, or take an appeal, without probable cause and for the purpose of harassing or maliciously injuring any person.” (See also ABA Model Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 4.4(a) [“a lawyer shall not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person’”’].)

The Business & Professions Code imposes a duty on attorneys “[n]Jot to encourage - either the commencementor the continuanceofan action or Nn proceeding from any corrupt motive ofpassion orinterest.” (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6068, subd. (g).) Similarly, rule 3-200(A)ofthe California Rules of Professional Conduct prohibits attorneys from - continuing employment whose objective is “[t]o bring an action, — conduct a defense,assert a position inlitigation, or take an appeal, without probable cause and for the purpose of harassing or maliciously injuring any person.” (See also ABA Model Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 4.4(a) [“a lawyer shall not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person’”’].)

(k) This subdivision is only intendedto provide that thefailure to report as required herein mayserve as a basis ofdiscipline. Althoughit is limited to a reversal ofjudgment, as opposedto “a modification or reversal,” Section 6068(0)({7) is roughly comparable to the judicial reporting requirementin Section 6086.7(a)(2). Thus,evenif judges are underreporting, the attor- neys themselves should be reporting cases in which misconduct or incompetence has led to reversal of a judgment.

9. Additional facts giving rise to this Motion are confidential and required to be kept confidential pursuant to California Business and Professions Code §6068(e), Rule 3-100(A) of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, and by the attorney-client privilege prescribed under Evidence Code §§950 et seq. 10.

- 6 - NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR DEFENDANT VEDANTI SYSTEMS LIMITED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4. Additional facts giving rise to this Motion are confidential and required to be kept confidential pursuant to California Business and Professions Code §6068(e), Rule 3-100(A) of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, and by the attorney-client privilege prescribed under Evidence Code §§ 950 et seq. 5.

See Martin Decl. ¶ 11 (citing Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6068(e)(1); Cal. Rule of Prof. Conduct 3.