| LEO Num | Topics | Summary | Date |
ABA-510
 Print
|
| (Under ABA Rule 1.18(c), a lawyer who has consulted with a prospective client can avoid her individual disqualification if she did not obtain any “significantly harmful” information from the prospective client (a standard addressed in ABA LEO 492 (6/9/20)). If the consulting lawyer faces individual disqualification because she has obtained such “significantly harmful” information, she can avoid her individual disqualification from being imputed to her whole law firm if she is screened, receives no part of the fee and provides written notice to the prospective client that the firm will represent the adversary. Notably, she must also have taken “reasonable measures to avoid exposure to more disqualifying information than was reasonably necessary to determine whether to represent the prospective client.” The consulting lawyer clearly must obtain information to check for conflicts (such as “the identity of other relevant parties, witnesses, and counsel”). It is also “necessary” for the lawyer to determine whether she can handle the matter competently, whether the client might be seeking to use the lawyer’s service to commit wrongdoing, whether the client has a meritorious claim or defense, etc. The consulting lawyer must also make a “business decision” about whether to represent the prospective client – focusing on time involved, likely fees, her interest in the matter, compliance with the firm’s “internal policy” about representing certain types of clients, etc. In contrast, such “necessary information” normally would not include facts about the representation that “might enable the lawyer to impress the prospective client” in an effort to land the business. Lawyers might have a business reason to “substantially investigate” a prospective client’s matter before accepting the representation, but it might not be “reasonably necessary” to do so – so she should recognize that a “free-flowing conversation” might result in an imputed disqualification, and consider “stopping [the] inquiry” after determining that her firm would not take the representation. The consulting lawyer might also be wise to decrease the likelihood of an imputed disqualification by “warn[ing] the prospective client that the lawyer has not yet agreed to take on the matter and that information should be limited only to what is necessary for the lawyer and client to determine whether to move forward with an engagement.”) | 3/20/2024 |
0318
Print
|
| [WITHDRAWN 11/18/21] A lawyer may not accept a representation when a partner had consulted with the opposing party about the possibility of representation, unless the opposing party consents. | 6/6/1979 |
1642
Print
|
| A bar association wants to set up a question referral network under which lawyers from other firms will answer questions without obtaining specific confidential or secret information. The Bar holds that it is likely that the lawyer answering a question will acquire confidential or secret information, and that therefore the inquiring lawyer should obtain the client's consent before asking the questions.The Bar explains that "the anonymous hypothetical approach to consultation encounters difficulties as more details are revealed during the consultation, and seemingly innocuous information may be harmful to the client if revealed to others." Although no attorney-client relationship arises between the inquiring lawyer's client and the answering lawyer, a "special relationship" arises. The consultation "would give rise to a reasonable expectation of confidentiality," so the answering lawyer should arrange for a disclaimer making it clear that the lawyer need not maintain the information's secrecy. Although no attorney-client relationship arises, the answering lawyer may not be adverse to the inquiring lawyer's client without the client's consent. To avoid possible disqualification, the answering lawyer should perform a conflicts check before answering any questions. The inquiring lawyer may not reveal the client's identity to the answering lawyer without the client's consent. [Rule 1.6 Comment [7a] discusses such "mentor" communications.] | 6/9/1995 |
1794
Print
|
| A husband planning to divorce his wife interviewed a number of lawyers in town, "but with no intent to hire them" because he already knows he will retain another lawyer. The wife interviewed that lawyer, and signed a disclaimer confirming that her initial interview "does not create an attorney/client relationship." The Bar held that lawyers must maintain the confidentiality of information they acquire from prospective clients. The disclaimer did not eliminate that duty, because it did not address the confidentiality issue. "To be effective, the disclaimer must clearly demonstrate that the prospective client has given informed consent to the attorneys' use of confidential information protected under Rule 1.6." Thus, the lawyer interviewed by the wife could not represent the husband unless the wife consented. In contrast, the husband's interview of other lawyers (including the one ultimately hired by the wife) did not create a duty of confidentiality, because the husband's "primary purpose in meeting with Attorney B was to preclude him from representing the wife." Thus, the wife's lawyer was not disqualified despite having acquired confidential information from the husband. The Bar further explained that a lawyer would be acting unethically if the lawyer were "to direct a new client to undertake this sort of strategic elimination of attorneys for the opposing party." | 6/30/2004 |
1382
Print
|
| A lawyer could work with a securities broker/ insurance agent in making presentations to potential clients, but must be careful to obtain the new client's consent to have the broker/agent present during any conversations protected by the attorney-client privilege. | 9/13/1990 |
1015
Print
|
| A lawyer discussing the possibility of representing a husband in an uncontested divorce matter realizes that the lawyer currently represents the wife in an unrelated matter. The lawyer may not represent the husband and also may not represent the wife in the divorce (having discussed confidences with the husband) [the Bar does not address the possibility of consent, although the request for Legal Ethics Opinion states that the wife would not object to the lawyer's representation of the husband.] | 1/5/1988 |
0903
Print
|
| A lawyer for an ex-wife may continue to represent her in a child custody matter even if the current wife (who will be a witness in the child custody matter) had asked the lawyer for advice about a child support issue (the lawyer had advised the present wife to see the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court Intake Officer). The Bar held that the lawyer had not received any confidences in a "professional relationship" and in any event would not be barred from representing a third party (the ex-wife). | 5/1/1987 |
1546
Print
|
| A lawyer interviewed about a possible divorce case by a wife may not represent the husband in a divorce case the wife brings three years later unless the wife consents. According to the Bar, "a potential client's initial consultation with an attorney creates an expectation of confidentiality which must be protected by the attorney even where no attorney-client relationship arises in other respects," although "the law firm may have an obligation to put the prospective client on notice that no attorney-client relationship exists between the firm and the prospective client until the firm accepts the engagement." | 8/12/1993 |
1363
Print
|
| A lawyer interviewing potential co-defendants in a criminal matter might learn confidential information from one that would preclude the representation of another. The Bar held that even if the first potential client consented, the lawyer could not represent the other criminal defendant because of the possible use of the first prospective client's confidences against the prospective client. | 6/13/1990 |
0220
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent a newspaper in a defamation action if one of its lawyers had pre-publication discussions with the plaintiff and attempted to dissuade the reporter from writing the article (because it was a "very close question" whether an attorney-client relationship arose between the lawyer and the plaintiff). | 11/28/1972 |
0227
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent a spouse in a divorce action when the other spouse had consulted the lawyer's firm, even if the spouse later hired another firm and the matters discussed were unrelated to the grounds ultimately at issue in the divorce. | 9/20/1973 |
0221
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent a wife in a divorce action when an associate had discussed the divorce with the husband (but had not been hired). The Bar noted that the lawyer requesting the Opinion lived in a small town and therefore "a moderately knowledgeable person could visit the office of each trial lawyer in town, without actual intention of hiring any of them, then retain counsel, and claim that every other lawyer was disqualified." | 11/29/1972 |
0337
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent a wife in domestic matter when two years earlier the lawyer had conferred with her husband about separation. | 9/21/1979 |
0271
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent the estate in a death action after talking with the surviving spouse who will be a defendant in the action. | 10/27/1975 |
0452
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent the husband in a divorce action when the lawyer had previously approached the wife at a social gathering and discussed her marital status "in detail." | 4/12/1982 |
ABA-358
Print
|
| A lawyer must maintain the confidentiality of any information received from a prospective client. If the lawyer receives only limited information, the lawyer may be free to take positions adverse to the prospective client in the same or related matter, but the lawyer would be barred from doing so if the lawyer learns "critical" information from the prospective client and cannot obtain the prospective client's consent to the adversity. The ABA suggests that lawyers obtain waivers of confidentiality in such circumstances, and screen the lawyers with the information from others in the firm. | 9/13/1990 |
0629
Print
|
| A lawyer who learns confidences during a professional discussion at a social engagement may not reveal the contents without the client's consent. | 11/13/1984 |
1601
Print
|
| A lawyer working at a state institution of higher learning may enter into an employment contract under which the lawyer must disclose to the administration information that the lawyer has obtained from those seeking legal advice. Although an "expectation of confidentiality" may arise in situations in which no attorney-client relationship exists, the lawyer may resolve any problems by issuing "a disclaimer to colleagues or students indicating that no attorney/client relationship will be formed and any information received will not be treated as secret or confidential." | 7/18/1994 |
1481
Print
|
| A lawyer's spouse worked in a crisis center, and received confidential information from a woman who called the crisis center. The spouse never revealed this information to the lawyer/spouse. The lawyer later began to represent (in a divorce case) the husband of the woman who had called the crisis center. Because the lawyer had not learned any of the confidences the spouse had acquired from the woman, and had never represented the woman, the lawyer may continue to represent the husband in the divorce matter. | 8/24/1992 |
0949
Print
|
| A legal aid society lawyer interviewed a spouse in a possible divorce matter. The spouse later hired a private lawyer. When the divorce action begins, the legal aid society represents the other spouse. The legal aid society must withdraw, but the private lawyer may continue to represent the first spouse (if the parties consent). The legal aid society may help find substitute counsel if the parties consent. | 7/8/1987 |
1633
Print
|
| A non-lawyer legal aid employee obtains general financial information from applicants to determine if they meet the pro bono standards. If a potential client is referred to one of a group of lawyers handling pro bono cases, the attorney-client relationship exists between the client and the lawyer to whom the client is referred. The "intake interview by non-lawyer staff personnel to determine a person's eligibility for legal aid services" (without the furnishing of any legal advice) does not create an attorney-client relationship with the legal aid office. However, identifying data about a potential legal aid office client is a secret which cannot be disclosed without the potential client's consent. Also, in most circumstances "an initial consultation with an attorney creates an expectation of confidentiality even where no attorney-client relationship arises in other respects." However, different rules apply to legal aid offices, because "a more stringent application of the rules and disqualification would result in decreased access to legal services for the indigent." The Bar recommends that the legal aid intake specialist should obtain a written informed consent at the intake interview in which the prospective client acknowledges "that the limited information given will not be treated as confidential for purposes of enabling the legal aid office to screen for conflicts or to make referrals." | 6/9/1995 |
1453
Print
|
| A university pre-paid student legal service office represents students in criminal matters only if the complaining witness or victim is a student and consents to the representation. The ethics rules permit contact with the student (who will be a witness and not a party to the criminal proceeding) and also permits making the representation of the student-defendant contingent on the witness' consent. Although no attorney-client relationship arises from the initial consultation between the office and the student-defendant, the meeting "created an expectation of confidentiality" that the lawyer must respect. | 3/24/1992 |
1707
Print
|
| Although a "lawyer's fiduciary duties extend to preliminary consultation by a prospective client with a view to engagement," it is not per se improper for a client engagement agreement to provide for binding arbitration of legal malpractice claims as long as there is adequate disclosure and consent. Like fee agreements, such initially-acceptable engagement agreement provisions might become improper given the "occurrence of unusual and extraordinary facts and circumstances not contemplated at the outset of the representation." The Bar declines to require any specific disclosures or insist that the client actually consult another lawyer before entering into such an agreement (in LEO 638, the Bar seemed to require that the client must be advised to seek independent counsel regarding an arbitration provision). Appropriate disclosures might include "waiver of trial by jury or by the court, discovery, evidentiary rules, arbitrator selection, scope of award, expense, appellate rights, finality of award, enforcement of award." | 1/12/1998 |
1832
Print
|
| Although not bound by lawyers' ethics rules, law firms' secretaries must maintain the confidentiality of information they learn. Thus, a secretary who receives confidential information from a prospective client whom the law firm does not represent (because it wishes to or already does represent the prospective client's adversary) must maintain the confidentiality of that information. Lawyers in that firm can avoid disqualification from representing the adversary if the lawyers screen the secretary from the matters, instruct the secretary "that she cannot reveal to the lawyer any confidential information obtained from Ms. X [the prospective client]," and use another staff person to work on the matter. In addition, the law firm "should send a written communication to Ms. X or her lawyer that these measures have been taken." Such screens do not prevent imputed disqualification involving an individually disqualified lawyer, but can successfully avoid imputation of a non lawyer's individual disqualification. The firm may have to withdraw from representing the adversary if the screen is breached. The Bar "recommends that the firm train non lawyer support staff to minimize confidential information obtained from prospective clients before they can perform the necessary conflicts analysis." | 5/10/2007 |
1559
Print
|
| Although there is no attorney-client relationship between the lawyer for an infant and the infant's mother (acting as "next friend" in a personal injury action), the lawyer may not represent the infant in an action against his mother without the mother's consent, because "while discussing the infant's case, the mother may have divulged confidential or secret information which may present an advantage to [the lawyer's] representation of the infant and a disadvantage to the mother as a party defendant." | 10/20/1993 |
0661
Print
|
| As long as the former client (the ex-wife of the prospective client) consents, a lawyer may represent the father of a child in a custody proceeding against the ex-wife, even though the wife had consulted the lawyer nine years earlier about marital problems. | 2/4/1985 |
1842
Print
|
| Because the duty of confidentiality attaches (according to the Preamble) "when the lawyer agrees to consider whether a client lawyer relationship shall be established," lawyers may use to their client's advantage (and represent the adversary of a prospective client who sent) a prospective client's (1) unsolicited voicemail message containing confidential information, sent to a lawyer who advertises in the local Yellow Pages and includes his office address and telephone number; (2) unsolicited e-mail containing confidential information, sent to a law firm which "maintains a passive website which does not specifically invite consumers to submit confidential information for evaluation or to contact members of the firm by e-mail." Someone submitting such confidential information does not have a reasonable basis for believing that the lawyer will maintain the confidentiality of the information, simply because the lawyer uses "a public listing in a directory" or a passive website. The lawyer in that situation "had no opportunity to control or prevent the receipt of that information," and "it would be unjust for an individual to foist upon an unsuspecting lawyer a duty of confidentiality, or worse yet, a duty to withdraw from the representation of an existing client." Lawyers might create a reasonable expectation of confidentiality if they include in advertisements or in their website language that implies "that the lawyer is agreeing to accept confidential information." In contrast to lawyers who merely advertise in the Yellow Pages or maintain a passive website, a lawyer would have to keep confidential (and would be prohibited from representing a client adverse to a prospective client which supplies) information provided by a prospective client who completes an on-line form on a law firm website which "offers to provide prospective clients a free evaluation of their claims." Law firms "may wish to consider" including appropriate disclaimers on their website or external voicemail greeting, or including a "click through" disclaimer "clearly worded so as to overcome a reasonable belief on the part of the prospective client that the information will be maintained as confidential." | 9/30/2008 |
1189
Print
|
| Because the wife has not consented, a lawyer may not represent a husband in a divorce case if one of the lawyer's associates had five years earlier met with the wife to discuss domestic matters (and the lawyer had viewed a memorandum memorializing that discussion), even though the associate who had earlier met with the wife had since left the firm. [Rule 1.10(b) would now permit this representation as long as no lawyer remaining in the firm has any material confidential information.] | 11/17/1988 |
ABA-448
Print
|
| Lawyers will not be subject to all of the duties they owe a client if a would-be client that the lawyer is appointed or directed by a tribunal to represent "refuses the representation." | 10/20/2007 |
1757
Print
|
| Legal aid society lawyers who are involved in client intake and advice must maintain the confidentiality of what they have learned. “It is irrelevant whether or not an attorney-client relationship ensued” as a result of any client intake interviews, and it is also “irrelevant whether or not the attorneys actually remember” the confidential information imparted to them. When the lawyers move to another legal aid society, their former employer must provide access to the files of clients they formerly represented. It is also necessary for the lawyers to obtain information about their previous work so that they can perform conflicts checks at their new employer. | 5/17/2001 |
1354
Print
|
| Two passengers and a driver interviewed a lawyer about representing them in an action against the other driver in an accident. However, the lawyer eventually determined that the two passengers should sue their driver. The lawyer told them that the lawyer could represent the two passengers against the driver only if the driver consented. The driver gave oral consent but later refused to provide written consent. The lawyer could not represent the two passengers, because the driver had essentially refused to confirm her oral consent (although oral consent is permissible, the Bar implied that a refusal to immediately sign a written confirmation essentially nullified the consent). [The summary of the LEO incorrectly states that "consent may be withdrawn by a former client at any time."] | 5/24/1990 |
492
Print
|
| Under ABA Model Rule 1.18, a lawyer who has received "significantly harmful" information from a prospective client may not (absent consent) represent that prospective client's adversary if the lawyer is not hired — although under some circumstances that lawyer's colleagues might be able to screen that lawyer and represent the adversary. The term "significantly harmful" does not include "information that causes embarrassment or inconvenience," but includes "information relating to '[c]ivil or criminal liability.'" Examples of "significantly harmful" information include: "views on various settlement issues including price and timing;" "personal accounts of each relevant event [and the prospective client's] strategic thinking concerning how to manage the situation;" an outline of "potential claims;" "specifics as to amount of money needed to settle the case;" "the underlying facts and legal theories about [a] proposed lawsuit;" "'sensitive personal information' in a divorce case;" "premature possession of the prospective client's financial information;" "knowledge of 'settlement position;'" "a 'prospective client's personal thoughts and impressions regarding the facts of the case and possible litigation strategies;'" "'the possible terms and structure of a proposed bid' by one corporation to acquire another." | 6/9/2020 |
1039
Print
|
| Unless the defendant consents, a lawyer may not represent a plaintiff in a personal injury action when the defendant had earlier consulted with the lawyer's partner about a possible representation, even if the firm was never retained, no fees were charged and the partner remembers nothing about the substance of the consultation. Relying on LEO 186-B, the Bar reiterated its opposition to imposition of an automatic finance charge on unpaid bills. Such finance charges are permissible "if the client has agreed to the amount of the attorney's fee, is able to pay, but desires payment be deferred for his convenience," and if the client "agrees to the terms [of the finance charges], retains the right to prepayment without penalty, and is not accessed [sic] a finance charge on fees prior to the time that the fees are earned by the attorney." | 2/17/1988 |
1146
Print
|
| Unless the victim consents, a lawyer must withdraw as counsel for a defendant in an attempted murder case if the lawyer acquired confidences during an earlier interview with the victim (who was seeking legal help at the time). | 10/6/1988 |