WI · rules
SCR 20:3.1
Meritorious claims and contentions
(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not:
(1) knowingly advance a claim or defense that is unwarranted
under existing law, except that the lawyer may advance such claim or
defense if it can be supported by good faith argument for an extension,
modification or reversal of existing law;
(am) A lawyer providing limited scope representation pursuant to
SCR 20:1.2(c) may rely on the otherwise self-represented person’s
representation of facts, unless the lawyer has reason to believe that such
representations are false, or materially insufficient, in which instance the
lawyer shall make an independent reasonable inquiry into the facts.
(2) knowingly advance a factual position unless there is a basis for
doing so that is not frivolous; or
(3) file a suit, assert a position, conduct a defense, delay a trial or
take other action on behalf of the client when the lawyer knows or when
it is obvious that such an action would serve merely to harass or
maliciously injure another.
(b) A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding, or the
respondent in a proceeding that could result in deprivation of liberty, may
nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of
the case be established.
History
WISCONSIN COMMITTEE COMMENT This Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule differs from the Model Rule in expressly establishing a subjective test for an ethical violation. ABA COMMENT [1] The advocate has a duty to use legal procedure for the fullest benefit of the client's cause, but also a duty not to abuse legal procedure. The law, both procedural and substantive, establishes the limits within which an advocate may proceed. However, the law is not always clear and never is static. Accordingly, in determining the proper scope of advocacy, account must be taken of the law's ambiguities and potential for change. [2] The filing of an action or defense or similar action taken for a client is not frivolous merely because the facts have not first been fully substantiated or because the lawyer expects to develop vital evidence only by discovery. What is required of lawyers, however, is that they inform themselves about the facts of their clients' cases and the applicable law and determine that they can make good faith arguments in support of their clients' positions. Such action is not frivolous even though the lawyer believes that the client's position ultimately will not prevail. The action is frivolous, however, if the lawyer is unable either to make a good faith argument on the merits of the action taken or to support the action taken by a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. [3] The lawyer's obligations under this Rule are subordinate to federal or state constitutional law that entitles a defendant in a criminal matter to the assistance of counsel in presenting a claim or contention that otherwise would be prohibited by this Rule.
Provenance
- Source
- www.wicourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-23
- Edition
- 2026-09-23
- Content hash
9eeac73b9c200b7cbf3ceea009731c60128a04f7fd7120426ef791228bd2292b
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.