Publications & Presentations

featured image
< Back

Ghostwriting Pleadings for Clients May Expose Attorneys to Sanctions

November 11, 2013

This article was written by: John L. Bunyan and Tyler J. Wetzel for the Volume X – Issue 3 – 2013 of the Carlock Copeland newsletter.

An attorney may agree to draft pleadings for a client — but not put their name on them — for a number of reasons. An attorney may want to help a client and get paid but not get too involved in the case, or the client may want to raise a questionable claim that the attorney does not want to put their name and reputation behind.

It is unclear, however, whether ethical and court rules allow attorneys to “ghostwrite” pleadings without disclosing their involvement to the court. Two federal circuit courts have concluded that attorneys must disclose their participation in drafting pleadings, while another circuit court concluded that an attorney did not engage in misconduct by ghostwriting pleadings. Read more from Carlock Copeland’s newsletter on: Ghostwriting Pleadings for Clients May Expose Attorneys to Sanctions

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Print this pageEmail this to someone