Giulia DiPasquale
Associate Editor
Loyola University Chicago School of Law, JD 2027
The legal profession has long emphasized a standard of professional responsibility. These rules have been “uniformly” applied to all licensed attorneys in the country. In practice, however, the realities of firm size can create what appears to be a two-tier system of Professional Responsibility. Large law firms operate under intense regulatory, reputational, and insurance oversight, while small firms and solo practitioners are often equipped with fewer resources which can expose them to disciplinary scrutiny more easily. These dynamics shape the ethical landscape of the legal profession.
What is the ARDC?
The Illinois Attorney Registration Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) is an administrative, self-regulating organization for all Illinois-licensed attorneys. The mission of the ARDC is to promote and protect the integrity of the legal profession, at the direction of the Supreme Court, through attorney registration, education, investigation, prosecution, and remedial action. If attorneys fall below the standard set in the Rules of Professional Responsibility, attorneys face the risk of disbarment, and sometimes even criminal liability. To remain in “good standing”, all registered attorneys in Illinois must register once per year with the ARDC, complete thirty hours of Continuing Legal Education (CLE), earned through courses, seminars, or workshops on legal topics, and pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE), which measures candidates’ knowledge and understanding of established standards related to the professional conduct of lawyers. To the “ethical lawyer”, practicing within the bounds of professional responsibility is a simple task. For others, the risk of malpractice or violating the rules of Professional Responsibility and Conduct looms.
Resource disparity
The most significant dividing line between large firms and smaller practices lies in resources. Large law firms often maintain entire regulatory infrastructures devoted to this type of compliance, to prevent both malpractice and sanctions from the ARDC. These include general counsel offices, in-house ethics committees, staff trained in trust account management, and sophisticated conflicts-checking systems. In addition, many corporate clients impose their own oversight through outside counsel guidelines, audits, and reputational pressures that force firms to adopt high standards of risk management. Malpractice insurance in these settings is typically purchased in high coverage amounts, and the financial strength of the firm ensures that costs can be absorbed without threatening the practice itself.
On the other hand, Small firms and solo practitioners operate with limited support, placing them at larger risk for violations. Malpractice insurance is optional in Illinois, and while attorneys must disclose if they do not carry coverage, many go without, due to cost. This means that a single mistake such as a missed deadline, a misplaced filing, or a mismanaged retainer, can not only trigger ARDC discipline, but can also threaten the lawyer’s financial survival.
Reputation disparity
This disparity extends beyond money too. Large firms can diffuse accountability across their employers. For example, when a mistake happens, it is difficult to pin responsibility on a single attorney. Solo practitioners and smaller firms, however, cannot “spread the blame”. Every mistake made is pinned on them alone, magnifying the likelihood of the ARDC getting involved. In addition, smaller firms tend to serve individuals and small-business clients, who are more likely to report their attorneys to the ARDC when dissatisfied. Large firms, however, serve corporate clients who are more likely to quietly negotiate disputes, instead of file official complaints.
Therefore, reputation is an important discussion point here. Large firms that have in-house compliance programs may be viewed as having taken “reasonable precautions,” even if a violation of professional responsibility occurs, which the ARDC will consider if an investigation occurs. A solo practitioner without this kind of infrastructure could be viewed as careless, even if they acted in good faith. In this way, compliance resources can look like a shield for larger firms, but a vulnerability for smaller practices.
Effects of disparities
In conclusion, these disparities reveal why professional responsibility, though theoretically uniform, functions differently in actual practice for large firms versus small firms and solo-practitioners. Large firms benefit from “buffers” and collective accountability, while solo practitioners are individually exposed and much more vulnerable to liability. The result is a system where small-firm lawyers tend to bear the brunt of formal discipline more often, while large firms rely on internal controls and client-driven accountability mechanisms, which allows them to squeeze by.
This difference is not explicitly written in the Federal Rules of Professional Responsibility or told to attorneys by the ARDC. Rather, it is more of the way the system operates in practice. Because of the legal compliance resources allotted to larger companies, it is less likely malpractice or professional responsibility violations would be flagged to the ARDC. Therefore, the effects this “two-tier Professional Responsibility system” has could leave the “small lawyer” at a higher risk of being noticed by the ARDC.
This imbalance creates an unfair professional environment, where big-law attorneys can commit comparable errors, but their large-firm may resolve the issue internally without formal reporting. In contrast, the solo practitioner is more likely to face public discipline, reputational damage, and even the loss of livelihood. In effect, discipline becomes less about the seriousness of the misconduct itself, and more about the structure and resources of the firm. This undermines the goal of a uniform professional responsibility code entirely, ruining trust in the fairness of the ARDC, and disproportionately penalizing those least able to obtain the larger resources.