RPC RULE 4.2
            COMMUNICATION WITH PERSON REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL


  In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate about the
subject of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be
represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the
consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a
court order.

Comment

  [1] This Rule contributes to the proper functioning of the legal
system by protecting a person who has chosen to be represented by a
lawyer in a matter against possible overreaching by other lawyers who
are participating in the matter, interference by those lawyers with
the client-lawyer relationship and the uncounselled disclosure of
information relating to the representation.

  [2] This Rule applies to communications with any person who is
represented by counsel concerning the matter to which the
communication relates.

  [3] The Rule applies even though the represented person initiates or
consents to the communication. A lawyer must immediately terminate
communication with a person if, after commencing communication, the
lawyer learns that the person is one with whom communication is not
permitted by this Rule.

  [4] This Rule does not prohibit communication with a represented
person, or an employee or agent of such a person, concerning matters
outside the representation. For example, the existence of a
controversy between a government agency and a private party, or
between two organizations, does not prohibit a lawyer for either from
communicating with nonlawyer representatives of the other regarding a
separate matter. Nor does this Rule preclude communication with a
represented person who is seeking advice from a lawyer who is not
otherwise representing a client in the matter. A lawyer may not make a
communication prohibited by this Rule through the acts of another. See
Rule 8.4(a). Parties to a matter may communicate directly with each
other, and a lawyer is not prohibited from advising a client
concerning a communication that the client is legally entitled to
make. Also, a lawyer having independent justification or legal
authorization for communicating with a represented person is permitted
to do so.

  [5] Communications authorized by law may include communications by a
lawyer on behalf of a client who is exercising a constitutional or
other legal right to communicate with the government. Communications
authorized by law may also include investigative activities of lawyers
representing governmental entities, directly or through investigative
agents, prior to the commencement of criminal or civil enforcement
proceedings. When communicating with the accused in a criminal matter,
a government lawyer must comply with this Rule in addition to honoring
the constitutional rights of the accused. The fact that a
communication does not violate a state or federal constitutional right
is insufficient to establish that the communication is permissible
under this Rule.

  [6] A lawyer who is uncertain whether a communication with a
represented person is permissible may seek a court order. A lawyer may
also seek a court order in exceptional circumstances to authorize a
communication that would otherwise be prohibited by this Rule, for
example, where communication with a person represented by counsel is
necessary to avoid reasonably certain injury.

  [7] [Washington revision] In the case of a represented organization,
this Rule prohibits communications with a constituent of the
organization who supervises, directs or regularly consults with the
organization's lawyer concerning the matter or has authority to
obligate the organization with respect to the matter. Consent of the
organization's lawyer is not required for communication with a former
constituent. If a constituent of the organization is represented in
the matter by his or her own counsel, the consent by that counsel to a
communication will be sufficient for purposes of this Rule. In
communicating with a current or former constituent of an organization,
a lawyer must not use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the
legal rights of the organization. See Rule 4.4.

  [8] The prohibition on communication with a represented person only
applies in circumstances where the lawyer knows that the person is in
fact represented in the matter to be discussed. This means that the
lawyer has actual knowledge of the fact of the representation; but
such actual knowledge may be inferred from the circumstances. See Rule
1.0(f). Thus, the lawyer cannot evade the requirement of obtaining the
consent of counsel by closing eyes to the obvious.

  [9] In the event the person with whom the lawyer communicates is not
known to be represented by counsel in the matter, the lawyer's
communications are subject to Rule 4.3.

Additional Washington Comments (10 - 11)

  [10] Comment [7] to Model Rule 4.2 was revised to conform to
Washington law. The phrase "or whose act or omission in connection
with the matter may be imputed to the organization for purposes of
civil or criminal liability" and the reference to Model Rule 3.4(f)
was deleted. Whether and how lawyers may communicate with employees of
an adverse party is governed by Wright v. Group Health Hospital, 103
Wn.2d 192, 691 P.2d 564 (1984). See also Washington Comment [5] to
Rule 3.4.

  [11] An otherwise unrepresented person to whom limited
representation is being provided or has been provided in accordance
with Rule 1.2(c) is considered to be unrepresented for purposes of
this Rule unless the opposing lawyer knows of, or has been provided
with, a written notice of appearance under which, or a written notice
of time period during which, he or she is to communicate only with the
limited representation lawyer as to the subject matter within the
limited scope of the representation. (The provisions of this Comment
were taken from former Washington RPC 4.2(b)).


[Amended effective September 1, 2006.]