Candid Advice

Rule 2.1 packs two commands into one sentence: a lawyer must exercise independent professional judgment, and must "render candid advice."¹ The first command governs whose interests shape the lawyer's judgment. The second governs what the lawyer does with that judgment once it exists: candor means telling the client honestly where the matter stands, whether or not the client wants to hear it. A lawyer can reach a sound, uncontrolled conclusion that a case is weak and still break the second command by describing the case only in hopeful terms. Because the two failures arise at different points, the rule lists the duties separately.

The duty exists because of how clients use advice. A client decides whether to sue, settle, sign, or walk away on the strength of the lawyer's account, and rarely can check that account against the law. That dependence is part of why the relationship is called fiduciary: the client entrusts affairs to the lawyer in circumstances that make close supervision difficult, so the lawyer's competence, diligence, and loyalty are vital.² One practitioner reduces the point to a sentence: "the relationship isn't about you."³ A lawyer who softens bad news to keep a client pleased has made the relationship about the lawyer's comfort, and the client then acts on a false picture. Candor also gives reassurance its value. A client who knows the lawyer reports honestly can rely on good news when it comes, while a lawyer whose optimism is automatic conveys no information at all.

Immigration practice supplies a recurring test. An immigration lawyer may learn, through discussions with the client or from other sources, that the client is not complying with immigration status.⁴ Whether the lawyer must then report the client is a confidentiality question outside this section. Candor asks something narrower and more immediate: the lawyer must tell the client plainly what the noncompliance means.

The failure is not limited to immigration or to dramatic harm. Ordinary litigation shows it just as clearly.

Hypothetical Illustration

A client who sued a former business partner over a handshake agreement asks for an update. The lawyer has read the file and concluded that the claim will probably fail: nothing is in writing, and the one witness is expected to contradict the client. Wanting to keep the client reassured and the engagement alive, the lawyer talks only about the favorable documents and says the case has momentum. The client turns down a modest settlement offer and pays another year of fees. The lawyer's view of the case was accurate; the failure lies in delivery. The client never received it, so the duty to render candid advice went unmet. A candid lawyer says that the missing writing and the contradicting witness make recovery unlikely and that the settlement offer deserves serious thought. The client may still reject the offer, but does so with an accurate picture.

Candor requires accuracy, and accuracy can mean good news as readily as bad. A lawyer need not sound gloomy about a strong claim. Nor does the duty give the lawyer control over what happens next. Once the honest assessment has been delivered, the decision generally remains with the client, a division of authority addressed later in this chapter. The usual exam error is to look for a candor problem only when the news is unwelcome. The rule targets any gap between what the lawyer believes about the matter and what the client is told.

The form of the assessment matters too. The comments to Rule 2.1 note that advice couched in narrow legal terms may be of little value to a client, especially where practical considerations, such as cost or effects on other people, are predominant.⁵ The reason follows from the purpose of candor. An accurate statement of the legal rule can still leave the client with a false picture of the choice when the factors that decide the matter go unmentioned.

The second sentence of Rule 2.1 expressly permits a lawyer to refer to considerations beyond the law, such as moral, economic, social, and political factors that may be relevant to the client's situation.⁶ The next section develops that permission.

Candid Advice

Endnotes9