Are there any exceptions to the confidentiality rule when a lawyer encounters inaction by higher authorities?

The confidentiality rule in the context of legal practice obligates attorneys to keep information related to the representation of a client confidential, with very few exceptions. Among these exceptions, the most significant is the duty to prevent imminent harm or substantial bodily injury.

When a lawyer becomes aware of a situation where non-action could likely lead to such harm, the law allows the lawyer to disclose confidential information in order to prevent that harm. This exception recognizes the moral and legal obligations of the lawyer to protect not only their client but also third parties who may be affected by the client's actions or decisions.

While there might be other circumstances under which a lawyer could disclose information, such as reporting certain types of misconduct or when the client intends to commit a crime, these are governed by different rules and do not necessarily pertain to the broader duty to prevent harm. Therefore, the key point is that when higher authorities are in inaction and potential harm is imminent, the lawyer can act to protect individuals from that harm, prioritizing safety over confidentiality in specific scenarios. This illustrates the balance the legal profession seeks to maintain between client confidentiality and the responsibility to prevent harm.