RPC RULE 3.5
                IMPARTIALITY AND DECORUM OF THE TRIBUNAL


  A lawyer shall not:

  (a) seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror or other official
by means prohibited by law;

  (b) communicate ex parte with such a person during the proceeding unless
authorized to do so by law or court order;

  (c) communicate with a juror or prospective juror after discharge of the
jury if:

     (1) the communication is prohibited by law or court order;

     (2) the juror has made known to the lawyer a desire not to
communicate; or

     (3) the communication involves misrepresentation, coercion, duress or
harassment; or

  (d) engage in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal.

Comment

  [1] [Washington revision] Many forms of improper influence upon a
tribunal are proscribed by criminal law. Others are specified in the
Washington Code of Judicial Conduct, with which an advocate should be
familiar. A lawyer is required to avoid contributing to a violation of such
provisions.

  [2] During a proceeding a lawyer may not communicate ex parte with
persons serving in an official capacity in the proceeding, such as judges,
masters or jurors, unless authorized to do so by law or court order.

  [3] A lawyer may on occasion want to communicate with a juror or
prospective juror after the jury has been discharged. The lawyer may do so
unless the communication is prohibited by law or a court order but must
respect the desire of the juror not to talk with the lawyer. The lawyer may
not engage in improper conduct during the communication.

  [4] The advocate's function is to present evidence and argument so that
the cause may be decided according to law. Refraining from abusive or
obstreperous conduct is a corollary of the advocate's right to speak on
behalf of litigants. A lawyer may stand firm against abuse by a judge but
should avoid reciprocation; the judge's default is no justification for
similar dereliction by an advocate. An advocate can present the cause,
protect the record for subsequent review and preserve professional
integrity by patient firmness no less effectively than by belligerence or
theatrics.

  [5] The duty to refrain from disruptive conduct applies to any proceeding
of a tribunal, including a deposition. See Rule 1.0(m).


[Amended effective September 1, 2006.]