Bindinglaw

MI · rules

MRPC Rule 3.5

Impartiality and Decorum of the Tribunal

activein force · 2026-01-01 – presentact-effective-date

A lawyer shall not:

(a) seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror, or other official by means prohibited by

law;

(b) communicate ex parte with such a person con cerning a pending matter, unless authorized to

do so by law or court order;

(c) communicate with a juror or prospective juror after discharge of the jury if:

(1) the communication is prohibited by law or court order;

(2) the juror has made known to the lawyer a desire not to communicate; or

(3) the communication constitutes misrepresentation, coercion, duress or harassment; or

(d) engage in undignified or discourteous conduct toward the tribunal.

Many forms of improper influence upon a tribunal are proscribed by criminal law. Others are

specified in the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct, with which an advocate should be familiar.

A lawyer is required to avoid contributing to a violation of such provisions.

During a proceeding a lawyer may not communicate ex parte with persons serving in an official

capacity in the proceeding, such as judges, neutrals, masters, or jurors, unless authorized to do so

by law or court order.

Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 62 Updated with MSC order(s)

A lawyer may on occasion want to communicate with a juror or prospective juror after the jury

has been discharged. The lawyer may do so, unless the communication is prohibited by law or a

court order, but must respect the desire of the juror not to talk with the lawyer. The lawyer may

not engage in improper conduct during the communication.

The advocate’s function is to present evidence and argument so that the cause may be decided

according to law. Refraining from undignified or discourteous conduct is a corollary of the

advocate’s right to speak on behalf of litigants. A lawyer may stand firm against abuse by a

judge, but should avoid reciprocation; the judge’s default is no justification for similar

dereliction by an advocate. An advocate can present the cause, protect the record for subsequent

review, and preserve professional integrity by patient firmness no less effectively than by

belligerence or theatrics.

Provenance

Source
www.adbmich.org
Retrieved
2026-09-30
Edition
2026-09-29
Content hash
8578181f2c6919b88880658a89226cf3fe57d3c2ee061ec710e5ef618002ea46
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.