October 2019

Courthouse Cricket: Discovery Missteps and the Duty of Candor to the Tribunal

By Jessica Whelan, Co-Author

Communiqué, Clark County Bar Association

We are all familiar with the tale of Pinocchio from when we were children—a boy marionette made of wood lives with his creator, an old Italian guy, who wishes upon a star that he would come to life. A fairy grants the wish and appoints a dapper insect to follow and guide the now self-aware-but-not-yet-real talking wooden boy and serve as his conscience. As if this is not enough to turn a young boy into a social pariah, oh yeah, his nose grows every time he tells a lie.

Looking back on this story as adults, we can only help but think one (well, maybe two) things: (1) what kind of sick person came up with that plot; and (2) wouldn’t it help us as lawyers if it were always so easy to tell when someone (think clients, opposing counsel, etc.) was lying? Which brings us to the ethics topic of the moment—Rule 3.3(a)(1)’s mandate that a lawyer not knowingly “[m]ake a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer.”

To read the full article, click here.

About the author

Jessica Whelan is a 2012 graduate of Harvard Law School . She is a former judicial clerk and practices in Holland & Hart’s Las Vegas office in commercial/appellate litigation and professional ethics.


Unless you are a current client of Holland & Hart LLP, please do not send any confidential information by email. If you are not a current client and send an email to an individual at Holland & Hart LLP, you acknowledge that we have no obligation to maintain the confidentiality of any information you submit to us, unless we have already agreed to represent you or we later agree to do so. Thus, we may represent a party adverse to you, even if the information you submit to us could be used against you in a matter, and even if you submitted it in a good faith effort to retain us.