General L Duties
L may not:
Criminal act that reflects adversely on the L’s:
Honesty, trustworthiness or fitness
Engage in conduct involving dishonesty or fraud
Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice
8.4 is triggered
L shall NOT in connection w/ Gov’t officials:
Not seek to influence judge, juror,
State or imply an ability to influence improperly a gov’t agency or official,
Knowingly assist a judge in conduct that violates laws/rule
Subject to Discipline
All states where licensed and
Where conduct took place (which rules apply)
IF illegal services than Licensed States apply
Who Controls Ls
Highest court in state – not legislature – controls profession
L is subject to Professional Conduct no matter what they are doing
Who Is Your Client?
Who is your Client for Exam?
Standard: Look at it from the POV of the C – § 14 and Togstad
If the C reasonably thinks that L represents them – duties owed
Did C manifest intent that L should provide legal services?
If this is yes but not C – than they were a PC
§ 14 à 1.18 à Imputed? See Conflicts
Did L manifest consent to provide legal services? Yes à C
Did L fail to manifest lack of consent? No à PC
General Duty
Ethical duty to rep consider even if cause is unpopular
Pro Bono
L has a professional responsibility to provide legal services
Should aspire to do 50 hours – 6.1
Court Appointments
L shouldn’t seek avoiding appt. by ct. EXCEPT for Good Cause: 6.2
Violation of Other Law (best argument);
Un® Financial Burden on L; OR
C is so Repugnant to L that it would impair relationship
Civil Case – Bothwell
Ct. has inherent authority to appt a L in a civil case
Marketability Analysis is how the judge goes about thinking about it
Voluntary Choice
You have a choice – except in Court Appointments
Representing C ≠ Representing their belief – 1.2(b)
Can tell C that you find them/action morally repugnant
Limiting Representation IF– 1.2(c)
ReasonableAND IC
Note: You can be hired to take on just one issue or stage of case
Prospective Client
C/L Relationship can arise…infra…intent, consent, lack OR ct appt. § 14
Duties to Prospective C – 1.18 and § 15
Even if relationship doesn’t happen – CONFIDENTIALITY
If someone discusses a problem but no relationship – L MUST:
Not use/disclose info,
Protect person’s property in L’s custody, and
Use ® care
No rep if:
Material adverse OR Substantially related matter AND
Law, Fact, Personal Relationship
L learned significantly harmful confidential info from PC, EXCEPT:
® steps taken to avoid exposure of info AND L is SCREENED, or
Both affected C and PC give IC
Non-Engagement letters
If C ® relies on something L tells them, even if L doesn’t think they were giving legal advice, C could have a COA (Togstad).
Note: C asking for advice is asking for legal services
Don’t say “don’t do something” b/c if C has a case – your screwed!
Anonymous
Mother came to him for an action, declined, than a case he was working on brought the mother in as a D and L did not WD = Violation
Joint Clients
One L represents more than one person in the SAME matter
Always have to worry about one C’s interests b/coming adverse to the other
Once adverse –If you took both –WD from BOTH
Must have IC from both parties
DePape, Perez
Third Party Beneficiaries
§ 51
Evaluation for Use by TP – 2.3
L can if ® believes it is compatible w/ the relationship (see 1.2)
If L knows/should know it will likely adversely affects C’s interests adversely – NO evaluation UNLESS IC
Greycas, ® Torts § 552, Paradigm Insurance
Organizations – 1.13
(a)
L represents org – acting through duly authorized constituents
(b)
“U
1.14
When C’s capacity to adequately make decisions – whether due to minority, mental impairment, etc.– L shall ® try to maintain a normal C/L relationship.
If L ® believes that C is at risk of SUBSTANTIAL physical, financial, or other harm – L may take ® necessary protection action and if appropriate seeking appt. of guardian.
Still protected by 1.6
L is impliedly authorized to reveal info about C in taking protective action BUT ONLY to the extent ® necessary to protect C’s interests
Test:
Can the C act in C’s own interests? No – Seek Guardian
L abide by C wishes and guardian determines what C wishes should be
Class Actions
L should act for the benefit of the class
Only have to give NOTICE to named Cs
Ending a Representation
L can WD under 1.16
C can fire L ANYTIME for ANY reason
Quasi-Clients
Client-fiduciaries, Fickett, p. 99
Intended TPB such as trustees, guardians, corporate directors, or partners
Need to clarify role
“Accommodation” clients
L agrees to rep someone as an accommodation to his actual C, usually to avoid duplicated services and higher fees
Loyalty to person paying bill
CONSENTABLE
If they can’t agree among themselves – than can’t rep them
Imputed Clients
Law Firms and Office Sharing
Office Sharing –Definition of Firm in 1.0(c) (important for 1.10)
1.10(a): While Ls are associated in a Firm
Cmt. 2 and 3: Whether depends on specific facts
Ls who share office space and occasionally consult – not be enough
How do they present themselves to the public?
Standard: What would a ® C think?
