Bindinglaw

AK · rules

Alaska R. Prof. Conduct 4.4

Respect for Rights of Third Persons

activein force · 2022-10-05 – presentact-effective-date

(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not use means

that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay,

or burden a third person, or use methods of obtaining evidence

that violate the legal rights of such a person.

(b) A lawyer who receives a writing or electronically

stored information relating to the representation of the lawyer’s

client and knows or reasonably should know that the writing or

electronically stored information was inadvertently sent shall

promptly notify the sender.

History

(SCO 1123 effective July 15, 1993; rescinded and repromulgated by SCO 1680 effective April 15, 2009; amended by SCO 1905 effective October 15, 2017; and by SCO 1984 effective October 5, 2022) COMMENT Responsibility to a client requires a lawyer to subordinate the interests of others to those of the client, but that responsibility does not imply that a lawyer may disregard the rights of third persons. It is impractical to catalogue all such rights, but they include legal restrictions on methods of obtaining evidence from third persons and unwarranted intrusions into privileged relationships, such as the client-lawyer relationship. Paragraph (b) recognizes that lawyers sometimes receive a writing or electronically stored information that was mistakenly sent or produced by opposing parties or their lawyers. A writing or electronically stored information is inadvertently sent when it is accidentally transmitted, such as when an email or letter is misaddressed or a document or electronically stored information is accidentally included with information that was intentionally transmitted. If a lawyer knows or reasonably should know that such a writing or electronically stored information was sent inadvertently, then this Rule requires the lawyer to promptly notify the sender in order to permit that person to take protective measures. Whether the lawyer is required to take additional steps, such as returning the writing or electronically stored information, is a matter of law beyond the scope of these Rules, as is the question of whether the privileged status of a writing or electronically stored information has been waived. Similarly, this Rule does not address the legal duties of a lawyer who receives a writing or electronically stored information that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know may have been inappropriately obtained by the sending person. For purposes of this Rule, “writing or electronically stored information” includes, in addition to paper documents, email and other forms of electronically stored information, including embedded data (commonly referred to as “metadata”), that is subject to being read or put into readable form. See Rule 9.1(v). Metadata in electronic documents creates an obligation under this Rule only if the receiving lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the metadata was inadvertently sent to the receiving lawyer. Some lawyers may choose to return a writing or delete electronically stored information unread, for example, when the lawyer learns before receiving it that it was inadvertently sent. Where a lawyer is not required by applicable law to do so, the decision to voluntarily return such a writing or delete electronically stored information is a matter of professional judgment ordinarily reserved to the lawyer. See Rules 1.2 and 1.4. LAW FIRMS AND ASSOCIATIONS

Provenance

Source
courts.alaska.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-24
Edition
2026-09-24
Content hash
b8700bf7b523507accd48a503e7214a1ecd0426ac11b474d3ddb5019cafc33fa
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.
Alaska R. Prof. Conduct 4.4 — Respect for Rights of T… · binding.law