This made the ‘Headlines’ part of Jay Leno’s ‘The Tonight Show’ last night (July 8, 2002 (Cite not provided because it’s not on their website). The gist of it was this- a bill either passed, or on the floor, of the senate provided protection for lawyers for advice they might give while either drunk or otherwise drug impaired.
Needless to say, Jay Leno was taken aback. And, needless to say, so was I. But, try as I may, I haven’t been able to find that bill anywhere on the 'net or anywhere in the government’s sites.
So, is this really a legitimate bill? Was it passed? If so, or if not, really, how in the hell would something like this ever make it as far as it (apparently) did?
This is flat-out ludicrous if it’s true (Part of me hopes someone simply had a little fun with PhotoShop).
Anyone heard of this, or is familiar with what he was talking about?
I would think that in most states attorneys who give counsel while under the influence are probably in violation of that state’s canon of professional ethics.
I shall have to ask my legal ethicist relative this question.
Leno said it was a bill that has been introduced into the Senate. Hundreds of such bills are introduced every year, mostly to please constituents or contributors. Only a very tiny minority ever get passed by the Senate. Even fewer also get passed by the House. Both are necessary. I doubt that there is any chance that this one will ever make it into law.
Out of curiosity, I’ve searched for such a bill using various sets of likely keywords, and found nothing close.
Moreover, the OP being fact is unlikely because regulation of lawyers’ liability in such cases is a state matter, not something for the federal government to consider.
Best guess is this was simply the Tonight Show having some fun.
Now it all makes sense. And Leno is proven (once again!) to be an ass.
LAP is a fairly common program. Lawyers and judges with drug or alcohol problems can seek confidential counseling from fellow lawyers or judges who have been trained in drug/alcohol counseling. The idea is that nobody understands the stresses and lifestyle better than a fellow judge or attorney.
The bill seems to guarantee the confidentiality of LAP counseling, restricting the ability to subpoena LAP records or compel the testimony of LAP counselors. This is hardly different than doctor-patient or priest-penitent confidentiality.
The bill does NOT immunize drunk or stoned attorneys from legal malpractice suits for negligent advice. One has to prove objectively in ANY malpractice case that the professional didn’t live up to the standard of the reasonable member of his/her profession (lawyer, doctor, architect, etc.). If the advice is bad under that standard, it’s irrelevant whether it was given drunk or sober. If the advice is OK under that standard, it’s also irrelevant whether it was given drunk or sober. In short, being able to prove that a lawyer was drunk or stoned when he gave advice should be irrelevant in a legal malpractice suit whether this bill becomes law or not.
Oh, please. Check the link to the Tonight Show. The headline Leno displayed says explicitly that lawyers will be protected from liability from mistakes made under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Not a word about Lawyer Assistance Programs. Nothing about irrelevance in malpractice suits.
If you want to blame the reporter who summarized the bill so poorly then do so. But Leno is not required to do serious research before making a joke in a comedy bit. If you think he is then every comic on television had better get off the air.
Exactly. I don’t see where this is Leno’s fault, not even close.
The fault lies with the reporter. If we’re really looking at the right bill, and it’s what the reporter was referring to, than he/she needs to go back to school and re-read the part on reporter’s responsibility.
