Justice Gilbert says in the second paragraph of this opinion that "California Rules of Court, rule 9.7, pertaining to the oath
required when an attorney is admitted to practice law, concludes
with, “ ‘As an officer of the court, I will strive to conduct myself at
all times with dignity, courtesy, and integrity.’" He then drops a footnote that says "Deletion of the words 'strive to' from the oath gives it the
potency it deserves."
Which is a pretty big hint that some attorney is going to be in trouble here.
And trouble she is indeed in.
The Court of Appeal affirms a $50,000 (!) sanction award against an attorney, Lisa Helfend Meyer, who disclosed information contained in a confidential child custody evaluation report. She didn't do it in open court, or in a filing, but nonetheless asked questions about that report in a deposition. That, the Court of Appeal holds, is an unambiguous no-no. Fully justifying the sanctions imposed by the trial court.
Plus the respondent gets awarded his costs on appeal.
There rules out there. Pretty important ones.
Fail to follow them at your peril.
