Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 73-3-37 (2026)
Duties of attorneys
✓ current as of July 2026
It is the duty of attorneys:
- (1) To support the Constitution and laws of this state and of the United States;
- (2) To maintain the respect due to courts of justice and judicial officers;
- (3) To employ for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to them, such means only as are consistent with truth, and never to seek to mislead by any artifice or false statement of the law;
- (4) To maintain inviolate the confidence and, at every peril to themselves, to preserve the secrets of their clients;
- (5) To abstain from all offensive personalities, and to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which they are charged;
- (6) To encourage neither the commencement nor continuance of an action or proceeding from any motives of passion or personal interest;
- (7) Never to reject, for any consideration personal to themselves, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed.
Codes, 1892, § 210; 1906, § 216; Hemingway's 1917, § 190; 1930, § 3693; 1942, § 8665; reenacted without change, Laws, 1983, ch. 457, § 5; reenacted, Laws, 1991, ch. 560, § 5; reenacted without change, Laws, 1999, ch. 372, § 6; reenacted without change, Laws, 2003, ch. 524, § 5; reenacted without change, Laws, 2006, ch. 471, § 5, eff. 7/1/2006.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1990–2020 · leading case: Roussel v. Robbins, 688 So. 2d 714 (Miss. 1996).
Roussel v. Robbins, 688 So. 2d 714 (Miss. 1996). “" Roussel also charged that Robbins had been "negligent in the carrying out of his duties as a member of the Mississippi State Bar," and that such negligence, along with Robbins' violation of the attorney's oath, and Miss. Code Ann. § 73-3-37 (1972), had also damaged him.”
Haynes v. Anderson, 597 So. 2d 615 (Miss. 1992). “Confidential communications between attorney and client are governed by Miss. Code Ann. § 73-3-37 (1972), "Duties of an Attorney.”
Jackson Med. Clinic for Women v. Moore, 836 So. 2d 767 (Miss. 2003). “See also Miss. Rules of Prof'l Conduct R. 1.”
Great Am. E & S Ins. Co. v. Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., 100 So. 3d 420 (Miss. 2012). “See Miss. Code Ann. § 73-3-37 (Rev.2012); Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.”
Baptist Health v. BancorpSouth Ins. Servs., Inc., 270 F.R.D. 268 (N.D. Miss. 2010). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 73-3-37(4) (2000). Although it is only the client who may claim the privilege, the client may also waive it.”
Great Am. E & S Ins. Co. v. Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., 100 So. 3d 453 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 73-3-37(4) (Rev.2008). The amended complaint claims that Quintairos, or the prior defense counsel, provided status reports or “evaluations” of “the settlement value” of the Chase lawsuit.”
Scott v. State, 8 So. 3d 871 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 73-3-37(4) (Rev. 2004) (“It is the duty of attorneys .”
Doherty v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. (S.D. Miss. 2020). “Parker UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 Based on the record, the Court cannot clearly find that Plaintiff’s counsel, through the Motion [129] filed on Plaintiff’s behalf, revealed the content of their communications with their former client, but because this issue is of such…”
Hunter L. Roussel, Jr. v. John Robbins, II (Miss. 1990). “" Roussel also charged that Robbins had been "negligent in the carrying out of his duties as a member of the Mississippi State Bar," and that such negligence, along with Robbins' violation of the attorney's oath, and Miss. Code Ann. §73-3-37 (1972), had also damaged him.”
Jackson Med. Clinic for Women, P. A. v. Grace Polles Moore (Miss. 1999). “” Miss. Code Ann. § 73-3-37 (4) (2000). ¶13.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 73-3-37(4) — 4 cases
Jackson Med. Clinic for Women v. Moore, 836 So. 2d 767 (Miss. 2003). “See also Miss. Rules of Prof'l Conduct R. 1.”
Baptist Health v. BancorpSouth Ins. Servs., Inc., 270 F.R.D. 268 (N.D. Miss. 2010). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 73-3-37(4) (2000). Although it is only the client who may claim the privilege, the client may also waive it.”
Great Am. E & S Ins. Co. v. Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., 100 So. 3d 453 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 73-3-37(4) (Rev.2008). The amended complaint claims that Quintairos, or the prior defense counsel, provided status reports or “evaluations” of “the settlement value” of the Chase lawsuit.”
Scott v. State, 8 So. 3d 871 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 73-3-37(4) (Rev. 2004) (“It is the duty of attorneys .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.