‼️
Prof Responsibility • Loyalty
PR#023
Legal Definition
Generally, taking inconsistent positions with respect to different clients does not present a conflict. However, if there is a significant risk that the lawyer's representation of one client will be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client due to these inconsistent positions, it may violate the Duty of Loyalty. According to Rule 1.7, such a scenario should be evaluated carefully to determine if a conflict of interest exists.
A good example of this would be "Big Law" firms. Jones Day, for example, is one of the largest law firms on the planet. They are constantly hired to deal with big political issues (and politicians) that are often inconsistent with one another.
A good example of this would be "Big Law" firms. Jones Day, for example, is one of the largest law firms on the planet. They are constantly hired to deal with big political issues (and politicians) that are often inconsistent with one another.
Plain English Explanation
Lawyers often handle many different cases for many different clients. Sometimes, these clients might have opposing views or arguments in their separate cases. For example, one client might want a law interpreted one way, while another client needs it interpreted differently for their case.
The legal system generally allows lawyers to represent clients with these conflicting positions, as long as the cases aren't directly against each other. This is because each case is judged on its own merits, and lawyers are expected to advocate for their client's best interests in each individual case.
However, there's a limit to this flexibility. If representing one client could significantly harm the lawyer's ability to represent another client effectively, it becomes a problem. This might happen if the conflicting positions are so closely related that the lawyer can't fully commit to both. In these situations, the lawyer has to carefully consider whether they can fairly represent both clients or if they need to step away from one of the cases.
The legal system generally allows lawyers to represent clients with these conflicting positions, as long as the cases aren't directly against each other. This is because each case is judged on its own merits, and lawyers are expected to advocate for their client's best interests in each individual case.
However, there's a limit to this flexibility. If representing one client could significantly harm the lawyer's ability to represent another client effectively, it becomes a problem. This might happen if the conflicting positions are so closely related that the lawyer can't fully commit to both. In these situations, the lawyer has to carefully consider whether they can fairly represent both clients or if they need to step away from one of the cases.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: Bob, an attorney, represents Sam in a personal injury lawsuit where Sam is arguing for a broad interpretation of a safety regulation. Meanwhile, Bob also represents another client in an unrelated case where that client wants a narrow interpretation of the same regulation. Result: This scenario likely does not violate the duty of loyalty. The cases are unrelated, and Bob can argue for different interpretations in different cases without directly harming either client's interests.
Hypo 2: Bob represents Sam in a contract dispute where Sam argues that a particular clause in the contract is valid and enforceable. In another case, Bob represents a different client arguing that an identical clause is invalid. The two cases are in the same jurisdiction and likely to be decided around the same time. Result: This situation presents a potential conflict. If one case creates a precedent, it could directly affect the other case. Bob should evaluate whether there's a significant risk that his representation of one client will materially limit his representation of the other. If so, he may need to obtain informed consent from both clients or withdraw from one of the cases.
Hypo 3: Bob represents Sam in a case arguing that a specific environmental regulation is constitutional. At the same time, another of Bob's clients in a different case is arguing that the same regulation is unconstitutional. Both cases are before the state Supreme Court and will be heard in the same term. Result: This scenario likely creates a conflict of interest. Bob's arguments in one case could directly undermine his arguments in the other, materially limiting his ability to represent both clients effectively. Bob should not continue to represent both clients unless he can obtain informed consent from both and reasonably believes he can provide competent representation to each.
Hypo 2: Bob represents Sam in a contract dispute where Sam argues that a particular clause in the contract is valid and enforceable. In another case, Bob represents a different client arguing that an identical clause is invalid. The two cases are in the same jurisdiction and likely to be decided around the same time. Result: This situation presents a potential conflict. If one case creates a precedent, it could directly affect the other case. Bob should evaluate whether there's a significant risk that his representation of one client will materially limit his representation of the other. If so, he may need to obtain informed consent from both clients or withdraw from one of the cases.
Hypo 3: Bob represents Sam in a case arguing that a specific environmental regulation is constitutional. At the same time, another of Bob's clients in a different case is arguing that the same regulation is unconstitutional. Both cases are before the state Supreme Court and will be heard in the same term. Result: This scenario likely creates a conflict of interest. Bob's arguments in one case could directly undermine his arguments in the other, materially limiting his ability to represent both clients effectively. Bob should not continue to represent both clients unless he can obtain informed consent from both and reasonably believes he can provide competent representation to each.
Visual Aids
Related Concepts
Are lawyers allowed to have sex with their clients?
Can an attorney continue to represent a client if a conflict exists?
How can a lawyer limit their malpractice liability with a client?
How can screening avoid imputed conflicts?
How do the California rules differ from the ABA when it comes to a lawyer accepting compensation from a party other than their client?
In assessing a conflict of interest, what is a concurrent conflict?
In assessing the Duty of Loyalty, what's the difference between an actual conflict and a potential conflict?
In California, are lawyer's allowed to have sex with their clients?
In California, how can a lawyer limit their malpractice liability with a client?
In California, how must a lawyer advise their client to seek independent counsel when dealing with potential financial conflicts?
In California, may a lawyer represent an insurance company and its policyholder as joint clients?
In California, what are the restrictions related to lawyers acquiring the media rights of their clients?
In California, what are the restrictions related to lawyers receiving gifts from their clients?
In California, when may a lawyer loan money to a client?
What are some common issues that occur when a lawyer represents multiple clients in the same matter?
What are the most common types of conflicts of interest that involve a lawyer's own interest?
What are the restrictions related to lawyers acquiring the media rights of their clients?
What are the restrictions related to lawyers receiving gifts from their clients?
What is an imputed conflict and how can it be resolved?
What is required in order for a lawyer to accept compensation from a party other than their client?
What is required in order for a lawyer to avoid a financial conflict with a client?
What is the Duty of Loyalty?
When does the general rule of imputed conflicts NOT apply?
When may a lawyer appear as a witness in a matter where they represent a party?
When may a lawyer loan money to a client?
When may there be a conflict of interest with a former client?
