This month’s question deals with the situation where a lawyer obtained a significant recovery for a client, and after the funds were distributed and the lawyer collected their fee, the client offered the lawyer a monetary gift as a way to show their appreciation for the lawyer’s work. Rule 1.8 of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct provides guidance on how to navigate this situation. Rule 1.8(c) prohibits lawyers from soliciting any substantial gift from a client, but Comment [6] to Rule 1.8 makes it clear that a lawyer may accept a gift from a client “if the transaction meets general standards of fairness.” Read more.

Every week brings a new headline: a lawyer or self-represented litigant is sanctioned for submitting filings containing “hallucinated” case law or statutes that were generated using Artificial Intelligence (“AI”).  This article explores why AI hallucinations happen, how to avoid them, and highlights the ARDC’s October 2025 release of The Illinois Attorney’s Guide to Implementing AI, a timely resource to help Illinois lawyers to better understand and use AI ethically and effectively in their law practice.  Read more.

When a lawyer can no longer practice due to death or disability, the consequences ripple far beyond the individual attorney.  This article explores how the ARDC’s Client Protection Program steps in to protect clients, preserve public trust, and support the profession during its most vulnerable moments.  Funded collectively by Illinois lawyers, the Program is a powerful example of how the profession takes responsibility for its own, and for the people it serves. Read more.

This month’s question asks whether lawyers are authorized to disclose confidential information when a client confides to their lawyer that they have thoughts of self-harm. Rule 1.6(c) requires that a lawyer reveal information relating to the representation of a client when the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm. Read more.

This month's question asks how lawyers can ethically and professionally respond to negative client reviews while honoring their duty of confidentiality under Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6. Except for limited exceptions, Rule 1.6 prohibits lawyers from revealing information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent or one of the exceptions provided in the rule applies. A negative review does not trigger the “self-defense” exception provided for in subparagraph (b)(5) of the Rule. A good approach would be to courteously explain to the client that confidentiality prevents addressing specific facts online or in a public setting, while noting that the lawyer does not agree with the review and offering to meet with the client to discuss the client’s concerns privately. Read more.

This month’s questions highlight the delicate balance lawyers must maintain between respecting a client’s autonomy and safeguarding them from potential harm, especially when representing clients who may be vulnerable due to cognitive decline, other physical or mental limitations, or social isolation. These questions also raise what steps lawyers can take to assess a client’s decision-making capacity to determine that a client’s directions are truly voluntary, and free from undue influence, coercion, or manipulation. Read more.