Ethics

In many federal courts, state rules do not control "ethical' issues even if the local rules of the district court adopt the state rules.  Some circuits go so far as to say that the district court errs if it feels bound by state rules.  E.g., In re Dresser, 972 F.2d 540 (5th Cir. 1992).  Consequently, something can be ethical under the state rules but unethical in federal court, and vice versa.  Id.  By itself, this approach to choice of law creates uncertainty.

A new twist I just saw comes from  the District of Colorado.  It adopted most of Colorado's revised disciplinary rules as its ethics rules, but not all, specifically rejecting some (such as Rule 4.4(b), which I think it didn't understand; but I digress).  The order is here.

I hadn't seen this sort of "cherry-picking" approach to ethics, and am not sure it works in the Tenth Circuit anyway, but it's fascinating.  Lawyer beware.