Court Opinion

ID: 9571256
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:30:16.904799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:30:14.441090
License: Public Domain

Thompson, J.,
concurring:
I concur, but wish specifically to direct attention to Canon 25 of the Canons of Professional Ethics. It reads in part: “A lawyer should not ignore known customs or practice of the Bar * * * even when the law permits, without giving timely notice to the opposing counsel.”1 It is the practice among members of the Nevada Bar for an attorney, who knows that a defaulting adverse party is represented by counsel in the pending case, to give notice of intention to have default entered. Twenty-one days after the defendant had been served with process, Mr. Martillaro was told (among other things) by Mr. Babcock that he (Babcock) had been engaged to represent the defendant. On that very day the defendant’s default was entered without notice to- Mr. Babcock. If the record on appeal could be read to show that Mr. Babcock relied upon the custom and practice referred to, I would not hesitate to find such reliance excusable. In such case, I would consider Hotel Last Frontier v. Frontier Properties, 79 Nev. 150, 380 P.2d 293, sufficiently on point to be controlling. However, the record before us does not show that Mr. Babcock failed to enter an appearance for the defendant because of an assumption that a default would not be entered without notice.
I do not suggest that Mr. Martillaro was obliged to *260extend time for the defendant’s appearance. I mean only that his plan to enter default should have been communicated to Mr. Babcock during the course of their telephone conversation on May 28. Mr. Martillar o’s duty to his client did not preclude an honest statement of intention. On the other hand, silence may lead opposing counsel to rely upon an assumption that professional standards will be followed.

The Canons were adopted by the Nevada State Bar Association (Rule 20, Rules of the Nevada State Bar), effective February 12, 1962, by order of the Supreme Court.