The Process and Your Comments
Proposed amendments to the Rules of the North Carolina State Bar are published for comment during the quarter after the council of the North Carolina State Bar approves their publication. The proposed amendments are published in the North Carolina State Bar's Journal and on this website. After publication for comment, the proposed rule amendments are considered for adoption by the council at its next quarterly meeting. If adopted, the rule amendments are submitted to the North Carolina Supreme Court for approval. Amendments become effective upon approval by the court. Unless otherwise noted, proposed additions to rules appear in in bold and underlined print, deletions are interlined. Proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct appear at the end of the page.
The State Bar welcomes your comments regarding proposed amendments to the rules. Please send a written response to L. Thomas Lunsford II, The North Carolina State Bar, PO Box 25908, Raleigh, NC 27611, or email@example.com, by April 14, 2017.
Council sends to NC Supreme Court for approval amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct specifying a lawyer’s duties when in receipt of information about a wrongful conviction.
Council approves the publication of rules creating a new specialty in privacy and information security law.
Four Rules of Professional Conduct are amended by the Council and published for comment.
Amendments Pending Approval of the Supreme Court
At its meeting on January 27, 2017, the council of the North Carolina State Bar voted to adopt the following rule amendments for transmission to the North Carolina Supreme Court for approval (for the complete text of the proposed rule amendments see the Winter 2016 edition of the Journal):
Proposed Amendments to the Rule on Judicial District Bar Dues
27 N.C.A.C. 1A, Section .0900, Organization of the Judicial District Bars
The proposed amendments shorten the time that district bars have to report delinquent district bar dues from 12 months to six months after the delinquency date.
Proposed Amendments to the Rule on Formal Hearings Before the DHC
27 N.C.A.C. 1B, Section .0100, Discipline and Disability of Attorneys
The proposed amendments to the rule on formal hearings before the Disciplinary Hearing Commission (DHC) allow media coverage of DHC hearings subject to the following conditions: absent a showing of good cause, the media will be permitted to broadcast and photograph formal DHC hearings; the chair of a hearing panel who denies a request for such access must make findings of fact supporting that decision; a request for media access must be filed no less than 48 hours before the hearing is scheduled to begin; the chair of the hearing panel must rule on such motion no less than 24 hours before the hearing is scheduled to begin; and, except as set forth in the rule, Rule 15 of the General Rules of Practice for the Superior and District Courts will apply to electronic media coverage of DHC hearings.
Proposed Amendment to the Certification Standards for the Criminal Law Specialty
27 N.C.A.C. 1D, Section .2500, Certification Standards for the Criminal Law Specialty
The proposed amendment to the standards for board certification in criminal law changes the requirements relative to peer review from opposing counsel and judges in cases recently tried by the applicant.
Proposed Amendments to the Regulations for PCs and PLLCs
27 N.C.A.C. 1E, Section .0100, Regulations for Organizations Practicing Law
The proposed amendments eliminate the requirement that a notice to show cause be issued to a professional corporation or professional limited liability company for failure to apply for renewal of a certificate of registration. The applicable statutes, N.C. Gen. Stat. §§55B-11 and 55B-13, do not require such notice prior to the suspension or revocation of a certificate of registration.
Proposed Amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct
27 N.C.A.C. 2, Rules of Professional Conduct,
Proposed amendments to two Rules of Professional Conduct require a prosecutor or a lawyer to disclose post-conviction information or evidence that may exonerate a convicted defendant. The proposed amendments to Rule 3.8, Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor, set forth specific disclosure requirements for a prosecutor who comes into possession of new, credible information or evidence creating a reasonable likelihood that a defendant was wrongfully convicted. Proposed new Rule 8.6, Information About a Possible Wrongful Conviction, sets forth comparable requirements for all other members of the Bar. In addition, the comment to Rule 1.6, Confidentiality, is amended to add a proposed cross-reference to new Rule 8.6.
At the time of adoption by the council, corrections were made to proposed new Rule 8.6(b)(2) and (3) to simplify that a lawyer may not disclose information if the disclosure would harm the interests of a former client as well as a current client.
At its meeting on January 27, 2017, the council voted to publish the following proposed rule amendments for comment from the members of the Bar:
Proposed Amendments to the Rule on Prehearing Procedure in Proceedings Before the Disciplinary Hearing Commission
27 N.C.A.C. 1B, Section .0100, Discipline and Disability of Attorneys
The proposed amendments require a settlement conference with the parties before a DHC panel may reject a proposed settlement agreement.
.0115 Proceedings Before the Disciplinary Hearing Commission: Pleadings and Prehearing Procedure
(a) Complaint and Service - ...
(i) Settlement - The parties may meet by mutual consent prior to the hearing to discuss the possibility of settlement of the case or the stipulation of any issues, facts, or matters of law. Any proposed settlement of the case will be subject to the approval of the hearing panel. The hearing panel may reject a proposed settlement agreement but only after conducting a conference with the parties. The chairperson of the hearing panel will notify the counsel and the defendant of the date, time, and venue (e.g., in person, telephone, videoconference) of the conference. If, after the conference, the first hearing panel rejects a proposed settlement, another hearing panel must be empanelled to try the case, unless all parties consent to proceed with the original hearing panel. The parties may submit a proposed settlement to a second hearing panel and may, upon the agreement of both parties, request a conference with the panel, but the parties shall not have the right to request a third hearing panel if the proposed settlement is rejected by the second hearing panel. The second hearing panel shall either accept the settlement proposal or hold a hearing upon the allegations of the complaint.
(j) Settlement Conference - ...
Proposed Amendment to IOLTA’s Fiscal Responsibility Rule
27 N.C.A.C. 1D, Section .1300, Rules Governing the Administration of the Plan for Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Accounts (IOLTA)
The proposed amendment clarifies that the funds of IOLTA may only be used for the purposes specified in the IOLTA rules.
.1313 Fiscal Responsibility
All funds of the board shall be considered funds of the North Carolina State Bar, with the beneficial interest in those funds being vested in the board for grants to qualified applicants in the public interest, less administrative costs. These funds shall be administered and disbursed by the board in accordance with rules or policies developed by the North Carolina State Bar and approved by the North Carolina Supreme Court. The funds shall be used only to pay the administrative costs of the IOLTA program and to fund grants approved by the board under the four categories approved by the North Carolina Supreme Court as outlined above.
(a) Maintenance of Accounts: Audit - ...
Proposed Amendment to the Rule on Uses of the Client Security Fund
27 N.C.A.C. 1D, Section .1400, Rules Governing the Administration of the Client Security Fund of the North Carolina State Bar
The proposed amendment clarifies that the Client Security Fund may only be used for the purposes specified in the rule.
.1416 Appropriate Uses of the Client Security Fund
(a) The board may use or employ the Fund for any of only the following purposes within the scope of the board’s objectives as heretofore outlined:
(1) to make reimbursements on approved applications as herein provided;
(2) to purchase insurance to cover such losses in whole or in part as is deemed appropriate;
(3) to invest such portions of the Fund as may not be needed currently to reimburse losses, in such investments as are permitted to fiduciaries by the General Statutes of North Carolina;
(4) to pay the administrative expenses of the board, including employment of counsel to prosecute subrogation claims.
Proposed New Inactive Status Rule in The Plan of Legal Specialization
27 N.C.A.C. 1D, Section .1700, The Plan of Legal Specialization
The proposed new rule enables certified specialists with special circumstances to be placed on inactive status for a period of time and to regain their status as certified specialists upon satisfying certain conditions.
.1727 Inactive Status
(a) Petition for Inactive Status. The board may transfer a certified specialist to inactive status upon receipt of a petition, on a form approved by the board, demonstrating that the petitioner satisfies the following conditions:
(1) Certified for five years or more;
(2) Special circumstances unique to the specialist constituting undue hardship or other reasonable basis for exempting the specialist from the substantial involvement standard for continued certification; including, but not limited to, marriage to active-duty military personnel requiring frequent relocation, active duty in the military reserves, disability lasting a total of six months or more over a 12-month period of time, and illness of an immediate family member requiring leaves of absence from work in excess of six months or more over a 12-month period of time; and
(3) Discontinuation of all representations of specialist certification in all communications about the lawyer’s practice.
(b) Duration of Inactive Status. If the petitioner qualifies, inactive status shall be granted by the board for a period of not more than one year at a time. No more than three years of inactive status, whether consecutive or periodic, shall be granted to any certified specialist.
(c) Designation During Inactive Status. During the period of inactive status, the certified specialist shall be listed in the board’s records as inactive. An inactive specialist shall not represent that he or she is certified during any period of inactive status; however, an inactive specialist may advertise or communicate prior dates of certification (e.g., Board Certified Specialist in Family Law 1987-2003).
(d) Annual Requirements. During the period of inactive status, the specialist shall not be required to satisfy the substantial involvement standard for continued certification in the specialty or to pay any fees; however, the specialist shall be required to satisfy the continuing legal education (CLE) standard for continued certification in the specialty. If a five-year period of certification ends during a year of inactive status, application for continued certification pursuant to Rule .1721 of this subchapter shall be deferred until return to active status.
(e) Return to Active Status. To return to active status as a certified specialist, an inactive specialist shall petition the board on a form approved by the board. The inactive specialist shall be reinstated to active status upon demonstration that he or she satisfied the CLE standard for continued certification in the specialty and the recommendation of the specialty committee. Passage of a written examination in the specialty shall not be required unless the inactive specialist failed to satisfy the CLE standard for continued certification during the period of inactivity.
(f) The right to petition for inactive status pursuant to this rule is in addition to the right to request a waiver of substantial involvement allowed by Rule .1721(c) of this subchapter.
Proposed Standards for New Specialty in Privacy and Information Security Law
27 N.C.A.C. 1D, Section .3300, Certification Standards for the Privacy and Information Security Law Specialty
The proposed new section of the specialization rules creates a specialty in privacy and information security law and establishes the standards for certification in that specialty.
.3301 Establishment of Specialty Field
The North Carolina State Bar Board of Legal Specialization (the board) hereby designates privacy and information security law as a specialty for which certification of specialists under the North Carolina Plan of Legal Specialization (see Section .1700 of this subchapter) is permitted.
.3302 Definition of Specialty
The specialty of privacy and information security law encompasses the laws that regulate the collection, storage, sharing, monetization, security, disposal, and permissible uses of personal or confidential information about individuals, businesses, and organizations, and the security of information regarding individuals and the information systems of businesses and organizations. The specialty also includes legal requirements and risks related to cyber incidents, such as external intrusions into computer systems, and cyber threats, such as governmental information sharing programs.
.3303 Recognition as a Specialist in Privacy and Information Security Law
If a lawyer qualifies as a specialist in privacy and information security law by meeting the standards set for the specialty, the lawyer shall be entitled to represent that he or she is a “Board Certified Specialist in Privacy and Information Security Law.”
.3304 Applicability of Provisions of the North Carolina Plan of Legal Specialization
Certification and continued certification of specialists in privacy and information security law shall be governed by the provisions of the North Carolina Plan of Legal Specialization (see Section .1700 of this subchapter) as supplemented by these standards for certification.
.3305 Standards for Certification as a Specialist in Privacy and Information Security Law
Each applicant for certification as a specialist in privacy and information security law shall meet the minimum standards set forth in Rule .1720 of this subchapter. In addition, each applicant shall meet following standards for certification in privacy and information security law:
(a) Licensure and Practice - An applicant shall be licensed and in good standing to practice law in North Carolina as of the date of application. An applicant shall continue to be licensed and in good standing to practice law in North Carolina during the period of certification.
(b) Substantial Involvement - An applicant shall affirm to the board that the applicant has experience through substantial involvement in privacy and information security law.
(1) Substantial involvement shall mean that during the five years immediately preceding the application, the applicant devoted an average of at least 400 hours a year to the practice of privacy and information security law but not less than 300 hours in any one year.
(2) Practice shall mean substantive legal work in privacy and information security law done primarily for the purpose of providing legal advice or representation, including the activities described in paragraph (3), or a practice equivalent as described in paragraph (4).
(3) Substantive legal work in privacy and information security law includes, but is not limited to, representation on compliance, transactions and litigation relative to the laws that regulate the collection, storage, sharing, monetization, security, disposal, and permissible uses of personal or confidential information about individuals, businesses, and organizations. Practice in this specialty requires the application of information technology principles including current data security concepts and best practices. Legal work in the specialty includes, but is not limited to, knowledge and application of the following: data breach response laws, data security laws, and data disposal laws; unauthorized access to information systems, such as password theft, hacking, and wiretapping, including the Stored Communications Act, the Wiretap Act, and other anti-interception laws; cyber security mandates; website privacy policies and practices, including the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA); electronic signatures and records, including the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-SIGN Act) and the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA); e-commerce laws and contractual legal frameworks related to privacy and data security such as Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI-DSS) and the NACHA rules; direct marketing, including the CAN-SPAM Act, Do-Not-Call, and Do-Not-Fax laws; international privacy compliance, including the European Union data protection requirements; social media policies and regulatory enforcement of privacy-related concerns pertaining to the same; financial privacy, including the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Financial Privacy Act, the Bank Secrecy Act, and other federal and state financial laws, and the regulations of the federal financial regulators including the SEC, CFPB, and FinCEN; unauthorized transaction and fraudulent funds transfer laws, including the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and Regulation E, as well as the Uniform Commercial Code; credit reporting laws and other “background check” laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act; identity theft laws, including the North Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act and the Federal Trade Commission’s “Red Flags” regulations; health information privacy, including the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA); educational privacy, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and state laws governing student privacy and education technology; employment privacy law; and privacy torts.
(4) “Practice equivalent” shall mean:
(A) Full-time employment as a compliance officer for a business or organization for one year or more during the five years prior to application may be substituted for an equivalent number of the years of experience necessary to meet the five-year requirement set forth in Rule .3305(b)(1) if at least 25% of the applicant’s work was devoted to privacy and information security implementation.
(B) Service as a law professor concentrating in the teaching of privacy and information security law for one year or more during the five years prior to application may be substituted for an equivalent number of years of experience necessary to meet the five-year requirement set forth in Rule .3305(b)(1);
(c) Continuing Legal Education - To be certified as a specialist in privacy and information security law, an applicant must have earned no less than 36 hours of accredited continuing legal education credits in privacy and information security law and related fields during the three years preceding application. The 36 hours must include at least 18 hours in privacy and information security law; the remaining 18 hours may be in related-field CLE or technical (non-legal) continuing education (CE). At least six credits each year must be earned in privacy and information security law. Privacy and information security law CLE includes but is not limited to courses on the subjects identified in Rule .3302 and Rule .3305(b)(3) of this subchapter. A list of the topics that qualify as related-field CLE and technical CE shall be maintained by the board on its official website.
(d) Peer Review - An applicant must make a satisfactory showing of qualification through peer review. An applicant must provide the names of ten lawyers or judges who are familiar with the competence and qualification of the applicant in the specialty field to serve as references for the applicant. Completed peer reference forms must be received from at least five of the references. All references must be licensed and in good standing to practice law in North Carolina or another jurisdiction in the United States; however, no more than five references may be licensed in another jurisdiction. References with legal or judicial experience in privacy and information security law are preferred. An applicant consents to confidential inquiry by the board or the specialty committee to the submitted references and other persons concerning the applicant’s competence and qualification.
(1) A reference may not be related by blood or marriage to the applicant nor may the reference be a colleague at the applicant’s place of employment at the time of the application. A lawyer who is in-house counsel for an entity that is the applicant’s client may serve as a reference.
(2) Peer review shall be given on standardized forms mailed by the board to each reference. These forms shall be returned to the board and forwarded by the board to the specialty committee.
(e) Examination - An applicant must pass a written examination designed to demonstrate sufficient knowledge, skills, and proficiency in the field of privacy and information security law to justify the representation of special competence to the legal profession and the public.
(1) Terms - The examination shall be given at least once a year in written form and shall be administered and graded uniformly by the specialty committee or by an organization determined by the board to be qualified to test applicants in privacy and information security law.
(2) Subject Matter - The examination shall test the applicant’s knowledge and application of privacy and information security law.
.3306 Standards for Continued Certification as a Specialist
The period of certification is five years. Prior to the expiration of the certification period, a certified specialist who desires continued certification must apply for continued certification within the time limit described in Rule .3306(d) below. No examination will be required for continued certification. However, each applicant for continued certification as a specialist shall comply with the specific requirements set forth below in addition to any general standards required by the board of all applicants for continued certification.
(a) Substantial Involvement - The specialist must demonstrate that, for each of the five years preceding application for continuing certification, he or she has had substantial involvement in the specialty as defined in Rule .3305(b) of this subchapter.
(b) Continuing Legal Education - The specialist must earn no less than 60 hours of accredited CLE credits in privacy and information security law and related fields during the five years preceding application for continuing certification. Of the 60 hours of CLE, at least 30 hours shall be in privacy and information security law, and the balance of 30 hours may be in related field CLE or technical (non-legal) CE. At least six credits each year must be earned in privacy and information security law. A list of the topics that qualify as related-field CLE and technical CE shall be maintained by the board on its official website.
(c) Peer Review - The specialist must comply with the requirements of Rule .3305(d) of this subchapter.
(d) Time for Application - Application for continued certification shall be made not more than 180 days, nor less than 90 days, prior to the expiration of the prior period of certification.
(e) Lapse of Certification - Failure of a specialist to apply for continued certification in a timely fashion will result in a lapse of certification. Following such a lapse, recertification will require compliance with all requirements of Rule .3305 of this subchapter, including the examination.
(f) Suspension or Revocation of Certification - If an applicant’s certification was suspended or revoked during a period of certification, the application shall be treated as if it were for initial certification under Rule .3305 of this subchapter.
.3307 Applicability of Other Requirements
The specific standards set forth herein for certification of specialists in privacy and information security law are subject to any general requirement, standard, or procedure adopted by the board applicable to all applicants for certification or continued certification.
Proposed New Retired Status Rule in The Plan for Certification of Paralegals
27 N.C.A.C. 1G, Section .0100, The Plan for Certification of Paralegals
The proposed new rule creates a retired status for certified paralegals subject to certain conditions.
.0124 Retired Certified Paralegal Status
(a) Petition for Status Change - The board shall transfer a certified paralegal to Retired Certified Paralegal status upon receipt of a petition, on a form approved by the board, demonstrating that the petitioner has satisfied the following conditions:
(1) Certified for five years or more;
(2) At least 55 years of age or older;
(3) Discontinued all work as a paralegal;
(4) Paid all fees owed to the board at the time of filing the petition; and
(5) The prohibitions on certification specified in Rule .0119(c) of this subchapter are not applicable to or formally alleged against the petitioner.
(b) Designation During Retired Status - During a period of retired status, the certified paralegal may represent that he or she is a “North Carolina State Bar Retired Certified Paralegal” or an appropriate variation thereof.
(c) No Annual Requirements - During a period of retired status, the paralegal shall not be required to file an annual renewal application pursuant to Rule .0120 of this subchapter, to pay an annual renewal fee, or to satisfy the annual continuing education requirements set forth in Rule .0120.
(d) Termination of Status - Retired certified paralegal status may continue for a period of time not to exceed a total of five years (or 60 months). At the end of five years (or 60 months) of retired status, certification will lapse and, to become a certified paralegal, the paralegal must satisfy all requirements for initial certification set forth in Rule .0119(a). A certified paralegal’s status may be changed from active to retired multiple times provided the five-year (60 months) period of retired status is not exceeded.
(e) Return to Active Status - A retired certified paralegal may return to active status at any time during the five-year period set forth in paragraph (d). To reactivate the “certified paralegal” credential, the certified paralegal shall file a petition with the board, on a form approved by the board, and shall pay a reactivation fee of $50. Upon transfer to active status by the board, the certified paralegal may hold herself or himself out as a “North Carolina State Bar Certified Paralegal” or an appropriate variation thereof. Thereafter, the certified paralegal shall complete continuing education and file annual renewal applications as required by Rule .0120 of this subchapter.
(f) Return to Work as Paralegal - A retired certified paralegal must file a petition for return to active status within 30 days of returning to work as a paralegal. Failure to do so will result in revocation of certification.
Proposed Amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct
27 N.C.A.C. 2, The Rules of Professional Conduct
Proposed amendments to Rule 1.3, Diligence, and Rule 8.4, Misconduct, of the Rules of Professional Conduct clarify the standards for imposition of professional discipline under each rule. The proposed amendments to Rule 7.2, Advertising, and Rule 7.3, Direct Contact with Potential Clients, explain the terms “electronic communication(s)” and “real-time electronic contact” as used in the rules and alert lawyers to state and federal regulation of electronic communications.
Rule 1.3 Diligence
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
Distinguishing Professional Negligence
 Conduct sufficient to warrant the imposition of warranting the imposition of professional discipline under the rule is typically characterized by the element of intent or scienter manifested when a lawyer knowingly or recklessly disregards his or her obligations. Breach of the duty of diligence sufficient to warrant professional discipline occurs when a lawyer consistently fails to carry out the obligations that the lawyer has assumed for his or her clients. A pattern of delay, procrastination, carelessness, and forgetfulness regarding client matters indicates a knowing or reckless disregard for the lawyer’s professional duties. For example, a lawyer who habitually misses filing deadlines and court dates is not taking his or her professional responsibilities seriously. A pattern of negligent conduct is not excused by a burdensome case load or inadequate office procedures.
(a) Subject to the requirements of Rules 7.1 and 7.3, a lawyer may advertise services through written, recorded or electronic communication, including public media.
 “Electronic communication(s),” as used in Section 7 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, refers to the transfer of writing, signals, data, sounds, images, signs or intelligence via an electronic device or over any electronic medium. Examples of electric communications include, but are not limited to, websites, email, text messages, social media messaging and image sharing. A lawyer who sends electronic communications to advertise or market the lawyer’s professional services must comply with these Rules and with any state or federal restrictions on such communications. See, e.g., N.C. Gen. Stat. §75-104; Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. §227; and 47 CFR 64.
  ...
[Renumbering remaining paragraphs.]
Rule 7.3 Direct Contact With Potential Clients
(a) A lawyer shall not by in-person, live telephone, or real-time electronic contact solicit professional employment from a potential client when a significant motive for the lawyer’s doing so is the lawyer’s pecuniary gain, unless the person contacted:
(1) is a lawyer; or
(2) has a family, close personal, or prior professional relationship with the lawyer.
(c) Targeted Communications. Unless the recipient of the communication is a person specified in paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2), every written, recorded, or electronic communication from a lawyer soliciting professional employment from anyone known to be in need of legal services in a particular matter shall include the statement, in capital letters, “THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES” (the advertising notice), which shall be conspicuous and subject to the following requirements:
(1) Written Communications. ...
(2) Electronic Communications. The advertising notice shall appear in the “in reference” or subject box of the address or header section of the communication. No other statement shall appear in this block. The advertising notice shall also appear at the beginning and ending of the electronic communication, in a font as large as or larger than any other printing in the body of the communication or in any masthead on the communication. If more than one color or type of font is used in the electronic communication, then the font of the advertising notice shall match in color, type, and size the largest and widest of the fonts. Nothing in the electronic communication shall be more conspicuous than the advertising notice.
(3) Recorded Communications. ...
 See Rule 7.2, cmt.  for the definition of “electronic communication(s)” as used in paragraph (c)(2) of this rule. A lawyer may not send electronic or recorded communications if prohibited by law. See, e.g., N.C. Gen. Stat. §75-104; Telephone Consumer Protection Act 47 U.S.C. §227; and 47 CFR 64. “Real-time electronic contact” as used in paragraph (a) of this rule is distinct from the types of electronic communication identified in Rule 7.2, cmt. . Real-time electronic contact includes, for example, video telephony (e.g., FaceTime) during which a potential client cannot ignore or delay responding to a communication from a lawyer.
  ...
Rule 8.4 Misconduct
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s fitness as a lawyer;
(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
 ...A lawyer’s dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation is not mitigated by virtue of the fact that the victim may be the lawyer’s partner or law firm. A lawyer who steals funds, for instance, is guilty of the most a serious disciplinary violation regardless of whether the victim is the lawyer’s employer, partner, law firm, client, or a third party.
 A showing of actual prejudice to the administration of justice is not required to establish a violation of paragraph (d). Rather, it must only be shown that the act had a reasonable likelihood of prejudicing the administration of justice. For example, in State Bar v. DuMont, 52 N.C. App. 1, 277 S.E.2d 827 (1981), modified on other grounds, 304 N.C. 627, 286 S.E.2d 89 (1982), the defendant was disciplined for advising a witness to give false testimony in a deposition even though the witness corrected his statement prior to trial. Conduct warranting the imposition of professional discipline under paragraph (d) is characterized by the element of intent or some other aggravating circumstance. The phrase “conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice” in paragraph (d) should be read broadly to proscribe a wide variety of conduct, including conduct that occurs outside the scope of judicial proceedings. In State Bar v. Jerry Wilson, 82 DHC 1, for example, a lawyer was disciplined for conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice after forging another individual’s name to a guarantee agreement, inducing his wife to notarize the forged agreement, and using the agreement to obtain funds.