Any lawyers around that can tell us if this rules applies to personal conduct outside of the law practice?
The reason I ask (maybe a stupid question) is Comment number 2.
http://www.txethics.org/reference_rules.asp?view=conduc... 2. Rule 8.04 provides a comprehensive restatement of all forms of conduct that will subject a lawyer to discipline under either these Rules, the State Bar Act, the TRDP, or the State Bar Rules. In that regard, Rule 8.04(a)(1) is intended to correspond to TRDP Rule 1.06(O)(1); Rules 8.04(a)(2) and 8.04(b) are intended to correspond to the provisions of TRDP Rules 1.06(O)(8) and (9) and Rules 1.06(O) and (U), as well as certain other crimes; and Rules 8.04(a)(7)-(11) are intended to correspond to TRDP 1.06(O)(3)-(7), respectively. Rule 8.04(a)(12) of these Rules corresponds to a prohibition that was contained in the last (unnumbered) paragraph of former Article X, section 7, State Bar Rules.
Which is related to attorney client privilege. But then again if you read comment 5.
5. Although a lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to his fitness for the practice of law, as fitness is defined in these Rules. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligations that legitimately could call a lawyer's overall fitness to practice into question.
Seems like the "even ones of minor significance" enough times could call his "overall fitness to practice into question."
The section on Jurisdiction seems to add some support. read comment 3
http://www.txethics.org/reference_rules.asp?view=conduc... 3. If the rules of professional conduct of this state and that other jurisdiction differ, principles of conflict of laws may apply. Similar problems can arise when a lawyer is licensed to practice in more than one jurisdiction and these jurisdictions impose conflicting obligations. A related problem arises with respect to practice before a federal tribunal, where the general authority of the state to regulate the practice of law must be reconciled with such authority as federal tribunals may have to regulate practice before them. In such cases, this state will not impose discipline for conduct arising in connection with the practice of law in another jurisdiction or resulting in lawyer discipline in another jurisdiction unless that conduct constitutes professional misconduct under Rule 8.04.
So I guess my question is what constitutes professional conduct? Maybe publishing second hand information contradicted by government documents and personal accounts to increase business of your law practice.
Sorry but o'neill makes me sick. What kind of values does it take to knowingly slander people that fought for our country? Sure he is entitled but it does compromise his ethics.