Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct Back to Outline
(Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof. Conduct, (1989) reprinted in Tex. Govt Code Ann., tit. 2, subtit. G, app. (Vernon Supp. 1995)(State Bar Rules art X [[section]]9))
III ADVOCATE 3.05 Maintaining Impartiality of Tribunal
A lawyer shall not:
(a) seek to influence a tribunal concerning a pending matter by means prohibited by law or applicable rules of practice or procedure;
(b) except as otherwise permitted by law and not prohibited by applicable rules of practice or procedure, communicate or cause another to communicate ex parte with a tribunal for the purpose of influencing that entity or person concerning a pending matter other than:
(1) in the course of official proceedings in the cause;
(2) in writing if he promptly delivers a copy of the writing to opposing counsel or the adverse party if he is not represented by a lawyer;
(3) orally upon adequate notice to opposing counsel or to the adverse party if he is not represented by a lawyer.
(c) For purposes of this rule:
(1) Matter has the meanings ascribed by it in Rule 1.10(f) of these Rules;
(2) A matter is pending before a particular tribunal either when that entity has been selected to determine the matter or when it is reasonably foreseeable that that entity will be so selected.
Comment:
Undue Influence
1. Many forms of improper influence upon tribunals are proscribed by criminal law or by applicable rules of practice or procedure. Others are specified in the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. A lawyer is required to be familiar with, and to avoid contributing to a violation of, all such provisions. See also Rule 3.06.2. In recent years, however, there has been an increase in alternative methods of dispute resolution, such as arbitration, for which the standards governing a lawyers conduct are not as well developed. In such situations, as in more traditional settings, a lawyer should avoid any conduct that is or could reasonably be construed as being intended to corrupt or to unfairly influence the decision-maker.
2. In recent years, however, there has been an increase in alternative methods of dispute resolution, such as arbitration, for which the standards governing a lawyer’s conduct are not as well developed. In such situations, as in more traditional settings, a lawyer should avoid any conduct that is or could reasonably be construed as being intended to corrupt or to unfairly influence the decision-maker.
Ex Parte Contacts
3. Historically, ex parte contacts between a lawyer and a tribunal have been subjected to stringent control because of the potential for abuse such contacts present. For example, Canon 3A(4) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits many ex parte contacts with judicial officials. A lawyer in turn violates Rule 8.04(a)(6) by communicating with such an official in a manner that causes that official to violate Canon 3A(4). This rule maintains that traditional posture towards ex parte communications and extends it to the new settings discussed in paragraph 2 of this Comment.
4. There are certain types of adjudicatory proceedings, however, which have permitted pending issues to be discussed ex parte with a tribunal. Certain classes of zoning questions, for example, are frequently handled in that way. As long as such contacts are not prohibited by law or applicable rules of practice or procedure, and as long as paragraph (a) of this Rule is adhered to, such ex parte contacts will not serve as a basis for discipline.
5. For limitations on the circumstances and the manner in which lawyers may communicate or cause another to communicate with veniremen or jurors, see Rule 3.06.
Bluebook Citation
Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. § 3.05, (Texas Center for Legal Ethics, 2024) from https://legalethicstexas.com/resources/rules/texas-disciplinary-rules-of-professional-conduct/maintaining-impartiality-of-tribunal/ (last visited Oct 30, 2024)