Also known as: Model Rule 1.16 · ABA Rule 1.16
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule of professional conduct requiring a lawyer to decline or withdraw from representation when continuing the representation will result in violation of the rules or other law. The rule also mandates withdrawal when the lawyer's physical or mental condition materially impairs the ability to represent the client or when the client persists in using the lawyer's services to commit a crime or fraud after the lawyer has discussed the limits of permissible assistance.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Rebecca Ross represents a corporate client in contract negotiations. During a heated exchange with opposing counsel, she makes repeated remarks about the lawyer's national origin that the client later reports as harassing. Rebecca recognizes that continuing the representation could expose her to discipline under the professional conduct rules. She therefore terminates the engagement and files a notice of withdrawal with the tribunal.
Ralph Richardson learns that his long-time real estate client is recruiting straw buyers and submitting falsified income documents to obtain mortgages that cannot be repaid. Ralph's role would include preparing deeds and attending closings that finalize the transactions funded by the fraudulent loans. Because the representation would assist the client's unlawful conduct, Ralph terminates the relationship and declines to handle the upcoming closings.
Rule 1.16(a) imposes a mandatory duty to decline or withdraw when representation will result in a violation of the rules or other law, when the lawyer's condition materially impairs representation, or when the client persists in seeking assistance for crime or fraud after discussion of limits. These grounds override client preference and require the lawyer to act even if the client wants the representation to continue.
No. When continued representation would violate Rule 1.7 or other rules, Rule 1.16(a)(1) requires withdrawal regardless of client consent or waivers. A court order may control the mechanics of withdrawal in pending litigation, but the lawyer must still seek to withdraw on her own initiative once the conflict or violation arises.
Withdrawal is required under Rule 1.16(a)(4) when the client persists in using the lawyer's services for fraud after the lawyer has explained the limits on assistance. Direct evidence of the client's intent, such as internal communications showing quota evasion or forged documents, combined with the lawyer's knowledge that the services will advance the scheme, satisfies the standard even if no filing has yet occurred.
Rule 1.16(a)(2) requires withdrawal when the lawyer's physical or mental condition materially impairs the ability to represent the client. Missed deadlines, visible fatigue affecting court performance, and a progressive condition that creates ongoing risk of further disruption establish material impairment even if the client prefers to continue and recent advocacy appeared coherent.