News
State Bar Ethics Report for April 2026
Below are the most pressing items addressed at the latest Ethics Committee meeting of the State Bar. I am including a link to the proposed amendments and opinions. In addition, here is the link to the State Bar Journal, which details the proposals and provides information to provide comments.
The Bar has revamped its website. The links below take you to the lists of proposed rule changes and opinions. If you click on a particular proposal, there is a form you can fill out to comment directly as to each proposal. In addition, as always, comments may be sent to comments@ncbar.gov. Notably, the proposals show in a different format in the State Bar Journal than they do on the website. The Journal goes through each proposed amendment in one document, whereas the website presents each section separately. The substance is the same, but personal preference may dictate how one wishes to review the proposals. Feedback is open until July 10, 2026 for Proposed Rules Amendments and July 6, 2026 for Proposed Ethics Opinions.
Proposed Rules Amendments Open for Comment Until July 10, 2026
Note: There are a large number of proposed rule changes. Although they are very briefly summarized here, I recommend you review the actual proposals.
27 N.C.A.C. 1A, Section .0700, Rules Governing Standing Committees of the Council: The proposal essentially combines the Issues and Access to Justice committees into a single Issues Committee that will now address the missions of both prior committees. The proposal also addresses the composition and quorum requirements for the Grievance Committee and its subcommittees, and makes clear that the ultimate decisions on grievance files are made by the Grievance Committee as opposed to subcommittees. This would change the provision in the current rule that provides that certain subcommittee grievance decisions are deemed the decision of the full committee unless the full committee takes action to the contrary at its next meeting .
27 N.C.A.C. 1D, Section .0900 and Section .1500, Rules Governing Procedures for the Administrative Committee: The proposal makes several changes to the administrative suspension process. The current rule provides for a 30-day show cause period before a suspension takes place, whereas the current proposal allows for a suspension order to be issued, to which a lawyer has 45 days to respond. This response stays the suspension order until the Bar can further consider the matter. The proposal also allows service of a suspension order by publication in the State Bar Journal if a member cannot otherwise be served with reasonable diligence. In addition, in Section .0904, the proposal extends the time period from 30 days to 45 days for a member to prevent a suspension order form taking effect by demonstrating administrative compliance. The proposed changes to Section .1517 address exemptions for full-time employees of the General Assembly, non-residents, and senior members. Notably, exemptions for non-residents and senior members must be claimed every year. Finally, as with the changes to Section .0900, the changes to Section .1521 allow service of a suspension order for non-compliance by publication in the State Bar Journal if a member cannot otherwise be served with reasonable diligence.
27 N.C.A.C. 1E, Section .0100 and Section .0200, Rules Governing the Regulations for Organization Practicing Law: Section .0102 would be amended to require prompt removal of the name of a disqualified member of a professional organization, and also to require local registration of trade names. Section .0103 would be replaced in its entirety. It sets forth the registration and renewal requirements for professional organizations. Section .0106, which provided form samples, would be deleted. Section .0201 would bring interstate or international firms within the registration requirement even if they maintain only a “systematic and continuous presence in North Carolina by virtual means.”
27 N.C.A.C. 3, Section .0500, Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law in the State of North Carolina: The proposal would amend Section .0503, regarding the licenses of relocated servicemembers and their spouses, pursuant to guidance from the United States Department of Justice.
Amendment Pending Supreme Court Approval
One of the proposed amendments discussed in the previous Ethics Update has now been adopted by the State Bar and is awaiting approval by the Supreme Court:
27 N.C.A.C. 1B, Section .0100, Rules Governing Discipline and Disability of Attorneys: The proposal makes changes to the procedure for issuing reciprocal discipline in North Carolina when a lawyer licensed here has been disciplined by “another jurisdiction/other jurisdiction.” This is a relatively lengthy proposal, and I recommend reviewing it. The specific changes include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) clarifying that tribunals of recognized Indian tribes are included in “other jurisdictions” but that North Carolina state courts are not, (b) establishing an initial review by the Grievance Committee before initiating reciprocal discipline procedures to determine whether there should be a separate substantive investigation, and (c) clarifying the process and factors to be considered when reviewing an attorney’s timely objection to reciprocal discipline.
Proposed Ethics Opinion Open for Comment Until July 6, 2026:
Proposed 2026 Formal Ethics Opinion 3, Providing Client with Editable Electronic Copies of Documents: The specific inquiry related to the drafting of a will. When a prior client did not want to pay the fee required to update his will, he demanded an editable, electronic copy of the will. The lawyer was not obligated to provide this to the client. The opinion reviews a lawyer’s duty to provide papers and property to a client. This would include a copy of the file (with certain allowed exceptions), and in this case, would include the final executed will. However, a lawyer is not required to provide all versions of a legal document such as a will. Prior drafts, unexecuted versions, etc., are not required to be provided. The opinion states that a similar conclusion can be drawn in other contexts but notes that lawyers must use professional judgment in determining whether to provide an editable electronic document. For example, if a client retains a lawyer to draft a fillable template for repeated use, the editable document is the work product for which the attorney was retained and therefore should be provided. Although a lawyer is not generally required to provide editable electronic copies of documents, the lawyer may do so if precautions are taken to prevent confidential information of other clients from being transmitted, including through metadata included in documents used repeatedly by the lawyer in practice.
Proposed Ethics Opinion Returned to Committee:
All three opinions open for comment prior to the April meeting of the Ethics Committee were returned to subcommittee for further study. These were all discussed in more detail in the previous Ethics Update, and include the following: Proposed 2025 Formal Ethics Opinion 3, Client Consent to Annual Rate Increase; Proposed 2026 Formal Ethics Opinion 1, Closing Attorney’s Referral to Law Partner’s Title Insurance Agency; and Proposed 2026 Formal Ethics Opinion 2, Release of Claims and Non-Disparagement Clause in Fee Agreement or as a Condition of Fee Dispute Resolution.
