Ethical Considerations

Published on April 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 48 | Comments: 0 | Views: 322
of x
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content


The Ethics Hour
*
*
*By Gerry Schulze, if you like it, or by Seth R.
Wilson, if you don’t.
*I don’t know who Seth R. Wilson is.
*
*Hypotheticals, p. 153
*Supplemental Hypotheticals, p. 171
*
*
*A lawyer shall not reveal information relating
to representation of a client unless the client
gives informed consent, the disclosure is
impliedly authorized in order to carry out the
representation or the disclosure is permitted
by paragraph (b).
*
*(b) A lawyer may reveal such information to
the extent the lawyer reasonably believes
necessary:
*(1) to prevent the commission of a criminal
act;
*(2) to prevent the client from committing a
fraud that is reasonably certain to result in
injury to the financial interests or property of
another and in furtherance of which the client
has used or is using the lawyer's services;
*
*(3) to prevent, mitigate or rectify injury to the
financial interest or property of another that is
reasonably certain to result or has resulted
from the client's commission of a crime or
fraud in furtherance of which the client has
used the lawyer's services;
*(4) to secure legal advice about the lawyer's
compliance with these Rules;
*
*(5) to establish a claim or defense on behalf of
the lawyer in a controversy between the
lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to
a criminal charge or civil claim against the
lawyer based upon conduct in which the client
was involved, or to respond to allegations in
any proceeding concerning the lawyer's
representation of the client or,
*(6) to comply with other law or a court order.
*
*(c) Neither this Rule nor Rule 1.8(b) nor Rule
1.16(d) prevents the lawyer from giving notice
of the fact of withdrawal, and the lawyer may
also withdraw or disaffirm any opinion,
document, affirmation or the like.
*
* Paragraph (b)(2) is a limited exception to the rule of confidentiality
that permits the lawyer to reveal information to the extent
necessary to enable affected persons or appropriate authorities to
prevent the client from committing a fraud, as defined in Rule 1.0
(d), that is reasonably certain to result in injury to the financial or
property interests of another and in furtherance of which the client
has used or is using the lawyer's services. Such a serious abuse of the
client-lawyer relationship by the client forfeits the protection of this
Rule. The client can, of course, prevent such disclosure by refraining
from the wrongful conduct. Although paragraph (b)(2) does not
require the lawyer to reveal the client's misconduct the lawyer may
not counsel or assist the client in conduct the lawyer know is
fraudulent. See Rule 1.2 (d). See also Rule1.16 with respect to the
lawyer's obligation or right to withdraw from the representation of
the client in such circumstances, and Rule 1.13 ( c), which permits
the lawyer, where the client is an organization, to reveal information
relating to the representation in limited circumstances.
*
* Paragraph (b)(3) addresses the situation in which the lawyer
does not learn of the client's crime or fraud until after it has
been consummated. Although the client no longer has the
option of preventing disclosure by refraining from the
wrongful conduct, there will be situations in which the loss
suffered by the affected person can be prevented, rectified
or mitigated. In such situations, the lawyer may disclose
information relating to the representation to the extent
necessary to enable the affected person to prevent or
mitigate reasonably certain losses or to attempt to recoup
their losses. Paragraph (b)(3) does not apply when a person
who has committed a crime or fraud thereafter employs a
lawyer for representation concerning that offense.
*
*What about the restrictions on how much the
lawyer can spend?
*
*(c) A lawyer shall not permit a person who
recommends, employs, or pays the lawyer to
render legal services for another to direct or
regulate the lawyer's professional judgment in
rendering such legal services.
*
* This Rule also expresses traditional limitations
on permitting a third party to direct or
regulate the lawyer's professional judgment in
rendering legal services to another. See also
Rule 1.8(f) (lawyer may accept compensation
from a third party as long as there is no
interference with the lawyer's independent
professional judgment and the client gives
informed consent).
*
* A lawyer may be paid from a source other than the
client, including a co-client, if the client is
informed of that fact and consents and the
arrangement does not compromise the lawyer's duty
of loyalty or independent judgment to the client.
See Rule 1.8(f). For example, when an insurer and
its insured have conflicting interests in a matter
arising from a liability insurance agreement, and
the insurer is required to provide special counsel for
the insured, the arrangement should assure the
special counsel's professional independence.
*
*Multiple passengers in the car.
*Variations on the theme.
*
*(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer
shall not represent a client if the representation
involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A
concurrent conflict of interest exists if:
*(1) the representation of one client will be directly
adverse to another clients; or
*(2) there is a significant risk that the representation
of one or more clients will be materially limited by
the lawyer's responsibilities to another client, a
former client or a third person or by a personal
interest of the lawyer,
*
* (b) Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of
interest under paragraph (a), a lawyer may represent a client
if:
* (1) the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be
able to provide competent and diligent representation to
each affected client;
* (2) the representation is not prohibited by law:
* (3) the representation does not involve the assertion of a
claim by one client against another client represented by the
lawyer in the same litigation or other proceeding before a
tribunal; and
* (4) each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in
writing,
*
* Ordinarily, clients may consent to
representation notwithstanding a conflict.
However, as indicated in paragraph (b), some
conflicts are nonconsentable, meaning that the
lawyer involved cannot properly ask for such
agreement or provide representation on the
basis of the client's consent. When the lawyer
is representing more than one client, the
question of consentability must be resolved as
to each client.
*
*Consentability is typically determined by
considering whether the interests of the clients will
be adequately protected if the clients are
permitted to give their informed consent to
representation burdened by a conflict of interest.
Thus, under paragraph (b)(1), representation is
prohibited if in the circumstances the lawyer cannot
reasonably conclude that the lawyer will be able to
provide competent and diligent representation. See
Rule 1.1 (competence) and Rule 1.3 (diligence).
*
* Informed Consent
* [18] Informed consent requires that each affected client be
aware of the relevant circumstances and of the material and
reasonably foreseeable ways that the conflict could have
adverse effects on the interests of that client. See Rule
1.0(e) (informed consent). The information required depends
on the nature of the conflict and the nature of the risks
involved. When representation of multiple clients in a single
matter is undertaken, the information must include the
implications of the common representation, including
possible effects on loyalty, confidentiality and the attorney-
client privilege and the advantages and risks involved. See
Comments [30] and [31] (effect of common representation on
confidentiality).
*
* Paragraph (b)(3) prohibits representation of
opposing parties in the same litigation, regardless
of the clients' consent. On the other hand,
simultaneous representation of parties whose
interests in litigation may conflict, such as
coplaintiffs or codefendants, is governed by
paragraph (a)(2). A conflict may exist by reason of
substantial discrepancy in the parties' testimony,
incompatibility in positions in relation to an
opposing party or the fact that there are
substantially different possibilities of settlement of
the claims or liabilities in question.
*Bananaberry, et al Hypothetical.
*Can you represent all of the plaintiffs?
*Assuming they all come to you together?
*Assuming one of them comes and offers to bring
his or her friends to see you.
*Assuming you have a vigorous letter writing
campaign and they all get your letter (which we
will assume complies with the advertising rules)
*
*Let’s say one of them—Mr. Bananaberry—is
already your client. Implications?
*
*What if Mr. Bananaberry failed to pay his
automobile insurance premium and his policy
lapsed? Are there any implications with
multiple representation?
*Assume further that Ms. Bluenose has $1,000,000
in underinsured motorist coverage, and the
Farnsworths have $25,000/50,000. Can you
arrange to settle Mr. Bananaberry’s claim for
$25,000, give most of the other $25,000 to the
Farnsworths, and settle Ms. Bluenose’s claim for
the remaining $12.95?
*
*What if Mr. Bananaberry’s chiropractor calls
you about the case?
*And offers to refer Mr. Bananaberry to you as
long as you agree to protect his lien?
*Assume Ms. Bluenose calls you. Before
litigation, can you call Mr. Tweedle and get a
recorded statement from him?
*Can you call the driver of her vehicle, Mr.
Bananaberry?
*
*In dealing on behalf of a client with a person who is
not represented by counsel, a lawyer shall not state
or imply that the lawyer is disinterested. When the
lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the
unrepresented person misunderstands the lawyer's
role in the matter, the lawyer shall make
reasonable efforts to correct the misunderstanding.
The lawyer shall not give legal advice to an
unrepresented person, other than the advice to
secure counsel, if the lawyer knows or reasonably
should know that the interests of such a person are
or have a reasonable possibility of being in conflict
with the interests of the client.
*What if you represented Mr. Tweedle on a DWI
about 20 years ago?
*
*(a) A lawyer who has formerly represented a
client in a matter shall not thereafter
represent another person in the same or a
substantially related matter in which that
person's interests are materially adverse to the
interests of the former client unless the former
client gives informed consent, confirmed in
writing.
*
*(b) A lawyer shall not knowingly represent a person
in the same or a substantially related matter in
which a firm with which the lawyer formerly was
associated had previously represented a client:
*(1) whose interests are materially adverse to that
person; and
*(2) about whom the lawyer had acquired
information protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that
is material to the matter; unless the former client
gives informed consent confirmed in writing,
*
*c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in
a matter or whose present or former firm has
formerly represented a client in a matter shall not
thereafter:
*(1) use information relating to the representation to
the disadvantage of the former client except as
these Rules would permit or require with respect to
a client, or when the information has become
generally known; or
*(2) reveal information relating to the representation
except as these Rules would permit or require with
respect to a client.
*
*Consent to conflict of interest
*
*Imputed Disqualification
*
*Conflicts arising from witness contacts.
*
*We must discuss ethics for an hour. It would be
unethical for me to stop here unless we’ve
already burned through an hour.
*That’s why there are supplemental
hypotheticals.
*Bananaberry II.
*Facebook Discovery Hypothetical.

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close