HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.barjournals/valaw0031 and id is 1 raw text is:
Legal ethics opinion, budget
approved by State Bar Council
In a lengthy five-hour session ed changes in three more canons of adopted by various vote margins
which opened proceedinogs at the the proposed Virginia Code of Pro- changes in Canions 5 and 6 and] thle
Virgin Ia State Bar's 44th Annual fessional Responsibility, remainder of Canion 2. The other
Meeting, the VSB governing Council Following considerable discussion portions of Canion 2 had already been P
on 'June 17 adopted a formal legal of the Code changes recommended adopted by Council at its Feb. 5
ethics opini'on affecting the defense by the VSB Special Committee to meeting.
cases which a commonwealth's, Study the Code of Professional
county, city or town attorney may ac- Responsibility, and consideration of (Editor's note: For thle complete text
cept, gave its blessing to a budget of numerous amendments to these pro- of the disciplinary rules in thle Code
$1,205,220 for 1982-83 and approv- posed changes, Council members canons approved by Council, see
related story, this page.)
Meeting in Virginia Beach at the WALLER H. HORSLEY
outset of the State Bar's fouir-day Ani- ...Richmond native
niualI Meeting. June 17-20, fte
Countcil1-approved buId get o f H o r l y
r S~1,205,220 for the 1982-83' bar year
is $1 58,108 greater than the 1981.82 H r l y
budget, or anI increase of about 15
pecn.The 1982-83 budget in ) ~t k
f J d~cudes an appropriation of'$50,000 to yt k
thle VSB Clients,' Scurity Fund.
JPart of the budget Increase (c o c e
S ~fromt the necessity of hiring an addi-
tional State Bar staff member to) in-Hrsy,0.oRih
--vestigate Unauthorized Praict If miond and Alex T, tM ayvo, J r, 3 ), o f
Law (UPL) and lawyer misconduct Portsmouth took offic respectively,
complaints, as well as a secretary to as Prceiet and Peintlctof,
-Abate assist in running the State Bar's word * the 16,500-membelhr Virginila State
processing center. These additional Bro ue1 uigteS eEr
Federal Trade Commission Chairman James C. Miller Ill (at sretaff poins aore the frst oes 44th Annua Meeting aIt the Cavalier
podium) delivers the VS13 Annual Meeting Luncheon Address create in es m or stha n s he yers. and Holiday in hotels InI Virginlia
on un 1. mmditePat reidntWilim . of ad ven afe ths w oiin rng Beach.
MPon f lan te pomditum. Prsdn WlimB.Pf n the VSB's full-time staff tlo 19 per- President fhorslcy su(ccds
Mrs.Poffflak th podumsons, the Virginia State Bar will still Roanoke lawyer William'l B, Puff,
have thle smallest staff size per lawyer
S[population of any stae bar in tie partier in) tihe firi of' W ioods,
W r Rogers, Muse, Walker & Thornton
C u t or r ofF Ccountry. ., sinc 19I Pofw. ereo h
Another reason for thle budget In- Stt Ea' Excui, ofwI eve m ite n
crease Is the inclusion of' a $50,000 tcBarsIMtI Cnmical(
rulings, M iller says aprpito e armake fr h governing CouniT(l in) 1982-83 In hIis
preparation, publication and capait a)s Ie diate1 Pst Presidentdo
distribution of a revised edition of Hose.VEPsintlctdr
An earthquake has taken place Miller stated that thle federal the 'Virginia Professional Hand- Ing 1981-82. assumed the( P~residcy
in this nation's attitude toward judiciary's increasing skepticism of book, containing the Virginia Code Cavalie theanfnua tl ' B eoatth
government regulation in the fast FlC attempts to enlarge thescope of of Professional Responsibility, UPI. Calie cear nt o ote e
b ilClub when heswasdsworniinto(office
several Years, evidenced by 'growing its regulatory authority is perhaps Rules and formal and informald legal b'y Virginia Governor Charles S.
public doubt about the wisdom of best ieflected in the fact that from ethics opinions. Robb.
many regulatory initiatives, however 1979-81, the courts denied enforce- An inflation factor of roughly Ur tb
well-i-itentioned, Federal Trade ment to ten FTC orders, double the eight percent also a,(Ccounts for part of th e irinEec toat callys
Commission (FT'C) Chairman j,,mes thle budget increase.
C. Miller, III told Virginia State Bar 'See MILLER, page 9 ' CONCIL, page 7 'See LEADERS, page 6
members, their spouses and guests;
on1ne09, oun ilfor te1923a i'/
Miller's remarks climaxed pro.ts Caod e
e m1n. UCoechanges
ceedings at the State Bar's 44th An- Xw
nual Meeting, June 17-20, at the
Cavalier and Holiday Inn hotels in Changes in Canons 2, 5 and 6 of to the Code. (see Virginia Bar News. Vol. 30, No.
Virginia Beach. He spoke during the the V' ginia Code of Professional Thus, whereas t he Code changes 9, March 1982).
Annual Luncheon. Responsibility were approved by the approved by Council at its October The Code Committee will present
The meeting was attended by a Virginia State Bar governing Council 1981 and February 1982 meetings its proposed changes in Canon -7 to
record 620 Virginia lawyers and at irs June 17 meeting in Virginia were basically those recommended by the VSB Council for its considration
judges who, with their spouses, Beach. the committee, the Canon 2, 5 and 6 and possible adoption at the Oct. 29
families and guests, brought the total Council members debated at changes are a blend of the judgments Council meeting in Roanoke. The
attendance figure to an all-time high length the merits of several of the of Council members, the Code Cor- committee hopes to have a Final
of more than 1,300 persons. Canon changes recommended by the mittee and The VBA. Council-approved Code ready
According to Miller, the attitude VSB Special Committee to Study the Council approved in its entirety following that meeting for submis-
of the courts toward federal Code of Professional Responsibility, the Code preamble recommended by sion to the Virginia Supreme Court.
regulatory agencies has shifted with and ended up adopting some thle Code Committee. The new Code will become effec-
that of the general public in recent disciplinary rules which are quite dif- The Council adopted the Code tive after it has been adopted by the
years, toward an increasing wariness ferent than those proposed by the Committee's proposed changes in high court,
of excessive regulation and, at the Code Committee. Another factor Canons 3, 8 and 9 at its Oct. 23, 1981 Probably the most controversial
same time, a growing intolerance of complicating the Code consideration mee!ting (see Virginia Bar News, Vol. change made by Council to the Code
ineffective regulatory action where process was the submission to Coun- 30, No. 5, November 1981) and in was in Disciplinary Rule (DR)
strong measures and expeditious cil by The Virginia Bar Association of Canons 1 and 4 and part of Canon 2 2-105(B), in which Council rejected
treatment are clearly needed. its report and recommended changes at its Feb.' 5 meeting in Richmond 'See CODE, page 4](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.barjournals/valaw0031&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)