Ind. Prof. Cond. Rule 8.3

Effective January 1, 2005

(a) A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional

authority.

(b) A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial

conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office shall inform the

appropriate authority.

(c) This Rule does not require reporting of a violation or disclosure of information if such

action would involve disclosure of information that is otherwise protected by Rule 1.6, or is

gained by a lawyer while providing advisory opinions or telephone advice on legal ethics

issues as a member of a bar association committee or similar entity formed for the purposes

of providing such opinions or advice and designated by the Indiana Supreme Court.

(d) The relationship between lawyers or judges acting on behalf of a judges or lawyers assistance program approved by the Supreme Court, and lawyers or judges who have agreed to

seek assistance from and participate in any such programs, shall be considered one of attorney and client, with its attendant duty of confidentiality and privilege from disclosure.

Comment

[1] Self-regulation of the legal profession requires that members of the profession initiate

disciplinary investigation when they know of a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Lawyers have a similar obligation with respect to judicial misconduct. An apparently

isolated violation may indicate a pattern of misconduct that only a disciplinary investigation can uncover. Reporting a violation is especially important where the victim is

unlikely to discover the offense.

[2] A report about misconduct is not required where it would involve violation of Rule 1.6.

However, a lawyer should encourage a client to consent to disclosure where prosecution

would not substantially prejudice the client's interests.

[3] If a lawyer were obliged to report every violation of the Rules, the failure to report any

violation would itself be a professional offense. Such a requirement existed in many jur-

isdictions but proved to be unenforceable. This Rule limits the reporting obligation to

those offenses that a self-regulating profession must vigorously endeavor to prevent. A

measure of judgment is, therefore, required in complying with the provisions of this Rule.

The term “substantial” refers to the seriousness of the possible offense and not the

quantum of evidence of which the lawyer is aware. A report should be made to the bar disciplinary agency unless some other agency, such as a peer review agency, is more appropriate in the circumstances. Similar considerations apply to the reporting of judicial

misconduct.

[4] The duty to report professional misconduct does not apply to a lawyer retained to represent a lawyer whose professional conduct is in question. Such a situation is governed

by the rules applicable to the client-lawyer relationship.

[5] Information about a lawyer's or judge's misconduct or fitness may be received by a lawyer in the course of that lawyer's participation in an approved lawyers or judges assistance program. In that circumstance, providing for an exception to the reporting

requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Rule encourages lawyers and judges to

seek treatment through such a program. Conversely, without such an exception, lawyers

and judges may hesitate to seek assistance from these programs, which may then result

in additional harm to their professional careers and additional injury to the welfare of clients and the public. These Rules do not otherwise address the confidentiality of information received by a lawyer or judge participating in an approved lawyers assistance

program; such an obligation, however, may be imposed by the rules of the program or

other law.