Also known as: Model Rules 1.4 · MR 1.4 · Rule 1.4 · ABA Model Rule 1.4 · communication rule
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule of professional conduct that imposes duties on lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed about the status of a matter, to promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, and to explain matters to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Matthew Martinez retained counsel to defend Midwest Airlines in a product liability suit. Counsel missed several court-ordered discovery deadlines without notifying Matthew. When the plaintiff moved for default judgment, counsel responded to Matthew's repeated emails with only general assurances that the matter remained under control. Matthew could not decide whether to seek an extension or pursue settlement because he lacked the required information.
Madison Meyers hired counsel to handle a data-privacy investigation at Morgan Financial. Regulators served a subpoena with a ten-day response deadline. Counsel ignored three emails from Madison requesting updates and disclosed the subpoena only after the deadline passed. Madison lost the chance to negotiate scope or seek protective relief before sanctions became likely.
The rule requires a lawyer to promptly inform the client of any decision or circumstance requiring informed consent. It also requires reasonable consultation about means to accomplish objectives, keeping the client reasonably informed about status, prompt compliance with reasonable requests for information, and explanation of matters to the extent reasonably necessary for informed client decisions.
Yes. When a client repeatedly requests specifics about deadlines and risks, general assurances that the matter is under control fail to satisfy the duties to keep the client reasonably informed and to comply with requests for information. The client must receive enough detail to participate in decisions about how to protect its interests.
Yes. A proposal imposing millions of dollars in new costs and operational changes constitutes a circumstance requiring the client's informed consent. The lawyer may not unilaterally explore alternatives without first informing the client so it can decide whether to accept, reject, or modify the terms.
The lawyer must consult the client about the legal limits on the lawyer's conduct. Silence or a plan to refuse later leaves the client unaware of the constraints and prevents informed decisions about how to proceed.
Yes. A formal investigation and subpoena with a short deadline are developments that require client decisions about strategy and risk. Ignoring update requests and allowing the deadline to pass before disclosure violates the duties to keep the client informed and to comply with reasonable requests for information.