What do Massachusetts and Alaska have in common (beyond the need for antifreeze)? It turns out that they share an unusual exception to the duty of confidentiality.
Massachusetts has an oft-discussed exception to Rule 1.6, which permits lawyers to disclose confidential information "to prevent the wrongful execution or incarceration of another.'" We've discussed it in a variety of posts (see, e.g., here and here), and it came up at the recent National Conference on Professional Responsibility in connection with the Alton Logan case.
Until today, I had been under the impression that Massachusetts was the only state to have such an exception. I just discovered, however, that Alaska adopted an identical exception as of April 15, 2009.
The adoption of the exception in two states does not make a trend, but for reasons set out in the earlier posts, I believe it is a worthy addition to the rules. For those of you who are involved in your state's rule making process, the exception is worth some consideration.