| LEO Num | Topics | Summary | Date |
0357
 Print
|
| | 3/10/1980 |
ABA-450
Print
|
| "When a lawyer represents multiple clients in the same or related matters, the obligation of confidentiality to each sometimes may conflict with the obligation of disclosure to each." Lawyers hired by an insurance company to represent both an insured employer and an employee must explain at the beginning of the representation whom the lawyer represents (which is based on state law). If there is a chance of adversity in this type of joint representation, "[a]n advance waiver from the carrier or employer, permitting the lawyer to continue representing the insured in the event conflicts arise, may well be appropriate." The lawyer faces a dilemma if he learns confidential information from one client that will cause that client damage if disclosed to the other client. "Absent an express agreement among the lawyer and the clients that satisfies the 'informed consent' standard of Rule 1.6(a), the Committee believes that whenever information related to the representation of a client may be harmful to the client in the hands of another client or a third person, the lawyer is prohibited by Rule 1.6 from revealing that information to any person, including the other client and the third person, unless disclosure is permitted under an exception to Rule 1.6." It is "highly doubtful" that consents provided by the jointly represented clients "before the lawyer understands the facts giving rise to the conflict" will satisfy the "informed consent" standards. Absent a valid consent, a lawyer must withdraw from representing the other client if the lawyer cannot make the disclosure to the client, and cannot fulfill his other obligations without such a disclosure. In the case of a lawyer hired by an insurance company to represent an insured, "[t]he lawyer may not reveal the information gained by the lawyer from either the employee or the witness, or use it to the benefit of the insurance company, when the revelation might result in denial of insurance protection to the employee." "Lawyers routinely have multiple clients with unrelated matters, and may not share the information of one client with other clients. The difference when the lawyer represents multiple clients on the same or a related matter is that the lawyer has a duty to communicate with all of the clients about that matter. Each client is entitled to the benefit of Rule 1.6 with respect to information relating to that client's representation, and a lawyer whose representation of multiple clients is not prohibited by Rule 1.7 is bound to protect the information of each client from disclosure, whether to other clients or otherwise." The insured's normal duty to cooperate with the insurance company does not undermine the lawyer's duty to protect the insured's information from disclosure to the insurance company, if disclosure would harm the insured. A lawyer hired by an insurance company to represent both an employer and an employee must obtain the employee's consent to disclose information that might allow the employer to seek to avoid liability for the employee's actions (the employee's failure to consent to the disclosure would bar the lawyer from seeking the employer's consent to forego such a defense). A lawyer facing this dilemma may have to withdraw from representing all of the clients, but "[t]he lawyer may be able to continue representing the insured, the 'primary' client in most jurisdictions, depending in part on whether that topic has been clarified in advance." | 4/9/2008 |
1683
Print
|
| A board which hears grievance appeals and adopts a city's personnel rules is represented by an independent counsel in any grievance hearing (with the city attorney representing the city), although the city attorney represents the board in adopting personnel rules. Assuming that the board and the city are separate clients (which is a legal issue), their interests are not adverse in the grievance proceedings -- because the board is "merely the dispute resolution system" and "does not have an interest in the various grievances" between grievants and the city. On the other hand, the city attorney may not represent the city in challenging a personnel rule adopted by the board, because the city attorney represented the board in adopting personnel rules. It is "not obvious" that the City Attorney could adequately represent both clients in this situation, so consent would not cure the conflict. No conflict would arise if the city attorney represented the city in challenging the board's "application of rules to the facts of the particular grievance, or challenge[d] the Board's decision in a particular case," because "those matters are not substantially related to any advice given by the City Attorney to the Board." [Rule 1.7(a)(1) follows a subjective "reasonably believes" standard rather than the old Code's objective "obvious" standard.] | 9/23/1996 |
1661
Print
|
| A City Attorney may represent a police officer in a case in which both compensatory damages and punitive damages are sought, even though the city would not be responsible for the payment of any punitive award. The city and the officer agree on the basic underlying facts and believe that they will advance consistent defenses. Still, the City Attorney must advise the officer in writing that the officer has the right to seek independent counsel to defend the punitive damage claim, and that the lawyer "would be required to withdraw from representation if discovery reveals the appropriateness of antagonistic defenses or that the officer acted contrary to City policy or outside the scope of his employment." The Bar analogized the situation to a lawyer hired by an insurance company representing an insured -- "although paid by the insurer, the lawyer must represent the insured with undivided loyalty;" may not disclose or use confidences or secrets "which may create a policy defense for the insurance company;" and must withdraw if the insured and insurer disagree about whether to settle the case. | 2/28/1996 |
1422
Print
|
| A county attorney's office may not represent a regional transportation district commission which was conducting transactions with the county, because of the possibility of differing interests. This "forseeability of future conflicts" renders it "not obvious" that the lawyer could represent both the county and the commission. The Bar declined to determine if the lawyer working for the commission could be effectively screened from related county work. [Rule 1.7(a)(1) follows a subjective "reasonably believes" standard rather than the old Code's objective "obvious" standard.] | 6/13/1991 |
1796
Print
|
| A criminal defense lawyer acted improperly in representing two criminal defendants in separate cases, knowing that one defendant's defense to a fire arms charge was based on his acquisition of a gun to protect himself from the other defendant. The Bar concluded that "the adverse affect [sic] of these simultaneous representations was too clear to have reasonably been believed otherwise." Although consent could not have cured the conflict, the Bar also noted that the lawyer had not obtained consent after full disclosure. | 3/31/2004 |
0733
Print
|
| A criminal defense lawyer may also represent a party in a related civil action. | 4/3/1986 |
1315
Print
|
| A decedent died after transferring accounts and placing items in a safety deposit box. Plaintiff challenges the transfer and disputes ownership of the safety deposit box's contents. The plaintiff has sued both administrators -- one of which is a lawyer. The same firm cannot represent both administrators if there is a dispute between them about the transfer or the ownership of the box's contents. The lawyer-administrator's partner may undertake the representation even if the lawyer must be a witness, as long as the issues do not relate to the firm or its legal work, and provided that the lawyer does not intend to perform any advocacy functions in the future. | 2/15/1990 |
0725
Print
|
| A law firm may represent a hospital and a plaintiff in unrelated or even related matters adverse to a doctor, as long as it can adequately represent all interests and all clients have consented. If one member of the firm is disqualified, the entire firm is disqualified. | 8/30/1985 |
1007
Print
|
| A law firm may represent multiple asbestos defendants because the defendants' interests are not adverse to one another and the defendants have consented to the multiple representation. | 11/18/1987 |
1454
Print
|
| A law firm rendered an opinion to a federal agency which took over a financial institution. The law firm also represents the same agency in unrelated matters. The firm has now been asked to represent an executive of the financial institution in a grand jury probe related to the receivership.The law firm may not represent the executive if it had obtained material secrets or confidences while rendering an opinion to the agency or in its current unrelated representation of the agency. The representation would otherwise be proper as long as the agency and the executive consent.If adversity develops between the agency and the executive during the course of the representation, the law firm must withdraw from representing the executive in the grand jury proceeding and the agency in the unrelated matter. | 3/13/1992 |
1337
Print
|
| A law firm represented a mother and her young child injured in an automobile accident allegedly caused by the mother's negligence. As the matter develops, the firm stops representing the mother and engages co-counsel to represent the child against the mother. Co-counsel has never met the mother and has only discussed the merits of the child's case with the lawyer. Both the firm and co-counsel may represent the child against the mother if the mother consents. [The Bar did not address the possible different positions of the lawyer and co-counsel (who had no contact with the mother).] | 4/20/1990 |
1494
Print
|
| A law firm represented a noteholder. When the borrower declared bankruptcy and foreclosure proceedings began, the same law firm represented the trustee under the deed of trust note. The trustee is considering whether to sell the land piecemeal to obtain a better value, although the noteholder opposes such a partial sale. Because the trustee has a fiduciary duty toward both the noteholder and the borrow, the disagreement about the partial sale creates a conflict precluding the same firm from representing both the noteholder and the trustee. Because it is not obvious that the law firm may adequately represent both, disclosure and consent would not cure the conflict. [The Bar's conclusion that consent would not cure this conflict might be different under Rule 1.7(a)'s "reasonably believes" subjective standard rather than the old Code's "obvious" standard.] | 12/14/1992 |
1526
Print
|
| A law firm representing both beneficiaries of and contributors to an employment benefit fund does not face a per se conflict, but because the interests of the two client groups are "potentially differing" all clients must consent and the lawyer must be prepared to either withdraw or "obtain separate counsel for the issues giving rise to a conflict" should a conflict develop between the clients. | 5/11/1993 |
1352
Print
|
| A lawyer acted as a "scrivener" for two shareholders of a corporation attempting to reach an agreement (the lawyer had represented the company, and therefore properly declined to represent either shareholder in their dispute). The Bar warned that a lawyer acting as a "scrivener" faces multiple representation problems, especially if the parties are not otherwise represented by lawyers. If a dispute arises between shareholders of a closely held corporation, the lawyer may not play any role if the lawyer had been the corporation's lawyer. If one of the parties called the lawyer to testify, the lawyer should move to quash the subpoena. If the court denies the motion, the lawyer may testify. [Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 5/8/1990 |
1126
Print
|
| A lawyer acted as scrivener in representing one corporation making an agreement with another corporation. Now that the arrangement has fallen apart, the lawyer may represent the corporate client, because the other corporation was never a client. [Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 8/11/1988 |
1671
Print
|
| A lawyer acting as both Commonwealth's Attorney and city attorney obtains an indictment against a builder in a building inspection dispute. One of the lawyer's assistants interviews the building's owner to obtain information for the criminal prosecution. The owner sues the builder and the city's building inspector in a civil lawsuit.The lawyer faces a conflict in prosecuting the builder while advising the building inspector and representing the city's interests in the civil litigation (because the lawyer "likely would have discovered the facts and circumstances surrounding the builder's dealings with the building inspector which would likely be adverse to the defense of the building inspector and the interests of the City"). This conflict was not curable by consent, because it was "not obvious" that the lawyer could play both roles.The lawyer's resignation as City Attorney does not remove the conflict, since the lawyer still owes duty to the former clients (the city and building inspector).One of the lawyer's assistants may continue to represent the city upon becoming full-time City Attorney even though the assistant had interviewed the building's owner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the builder. The interview "did not create an attorney-client relationship nor expectation of confidentiality" and therefore does not bar this lawyer from being adverse to the owner in the civil litigation (the bar noted that "victims of crimes are not clients of prosecutors"). [Rule 1.7(a)(1) follows a subjective "reasonably believes" standard rather than the old Code's objective "obvious" standard.] | 4/1/1996 |
1894
Print
|
| A lawyer faces several conflicts issues if she jointly represents multiple children who might have been abused at a childcare center, especially if there is only a limited insurance fund to pay all of the claimant clients. As “next friend” of each child, a parent can consent to such a joint representation. If there is only a limited fund available to settle all of the case, the settlement must comply with Rule 1.8(g)’s “aggregate settlement” rule - including a unanimous agreement among all the clients about “how the settlement is allocated and what amount shall be distributed to each.” In such an “aggregate settlement” situation, the lawyer may not participate in such an aggregate settlement if even one client disagrees with the settlement. To obtain court approval of the settlement, a guardian ad litem (GAL) must be appointed for the minor children. Such GALs are subject to the Virginia ethics rules “as they would be in any other case, except when the special duties of a GAL conflict with such rules.” If there is a limited fund for an aggregate settlement, the GAL must agree with that arrangement. A GAL “must be appointed to waive the lawyer’s conflict in representing multiple children.” A single GAL may represent all of the minor children, because a court has “[t]he final decision as to the division of the settlement proceeds or recovery.” A GAL must also be appointed if the efforts fail and litigation begins. | 4/20/2022 |
1410
Print
|
| A lawyer filing a products liability case may also represent the worker's compensation insurance carrier (which is potentially adverse to the plaintiff) if both clients consent. | 4/19/1991 |
0457
Print
|
| A lawyer had represented both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction. The lawyer should not have later represented one against the other in a dispute over the deed because it was "reasonably likely" that the lawyer might be a witness (having prepared the deed) and because the lawyer had previously represented the defendant in the same transaction. | 4/16/1982 |
0669
Print
|
| A lawyer in a divorce case may not prepare pleadings for both parties or for an unrepresented defendant, and likewise may not provide sample forms to an unrepresented defendant. [This LEO was overruled to the extent it is inconsistent with LEO 1112 and Va. Code § 20-99.1:1.] | 2/20/1985 |
1588
Print
|
| A lawyer involved in arranging a real estate transaction has not violated the Code, because the lawyer did not attempt to represent both the buyer and the seller, and fully disclosed that the lawyer might receive a percentage of the purchase price as a fee. Canon 9 did not apply, because the "appearance of impropriety" language "applies only in the limited context of . . . former judges, former government attorneys, and attorneys' improper influence upon a tribunal, legislative body, or public official." | 6/14/1994 |
1153
Print
|
| A lawyer may act as counsel for both the borrower and as trustee if the borrower consents after full disclosure. As settlement attorney, the lawyer may have an attorney-client relationship with the borrower, lender and seller. This is permissible if all clients consent after full disclosure. | 1/4/1989 |
0708
Print
|
| A lawyer may draft wills for both a wife and husband although the provisions of the wills differ, as long as the lawyer may adequately represent both parties' interests. | 8/6/1985 |
0957
Print
|
| A lawyer may not continue representing the former executive director of the Department of Social Services in a wrongful discharge action against the Department while also acting as a guardian ad litem for a child whose custody is in dispute because of alleged illegal actions by the former executive director. Although consent might cure this conflict, the lawyer cannot obtain consent from the child. | 8/2/1987 |
0391
Print
|
| A lawyer may not continue to represent three criminal co-defendants charged with the same crimes when two of the co-defendants had made incriminating statements against the third. | 9/23/1980 |
0223
Print
|
| A lawyer may not defend two insureds in a personal injury case while representing the insurer in a declaratory judgment action against them. | 4/18/1973 |
1524
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent a beneficiary in a wrongful death action without the consent of all the statutory beneficiaries. The lawyer may not contact the insurance adjuster if the defendant insured is represented by counsel. | 5/11/1993 |
0707
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent a husband in a contested divorce matter (including child custody issues) when the lawyer previously represented the husband and wife in the adoption of their children. | 7/11/1985 |
1181
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent any of three co-defendants when one of the co-defendants has admitted to a more intimate involvement in the crime, because the other two clients may be called as prosecution witnesses and the lawyer would be placed in the "untenable position of having to cross-examine his clients on the same matter as his defense of the same client, in order to exonerate another client." It is doubtful that consent would cure this problem. | 12/14/1988 |
0384
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent both a corporation and its president (who is also the corporation's majority stockholder) if the corporation has a potential claim against the president. | 8/5/1980 |
0741
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent both the adoptive and biological parents in an adoption case (even if the representation involves only counseling about possible questions from the court). | 1/20/1986 |
0418
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent competing mechanic's lien claimants unless the property would yield enough to satisfy all of them | 6/11/1981 |
1333
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent the mother and father of a deceased minor killed in an automobile accident when the mother and father are no longer married and have a hostile relationship. | 4/20/1990 |
0307
Print
|
| A lawyer may not represent two criminal co-defendants when there is a dispute between them about their roles in the alleged crime. The lawyer may not represent either defendant if the other is to be a witness in the criminal action. | 1/17/1979 |
0654
Print
|
| A lawyer may not reveal any confidential information jointly obtained from a former corporate and individual clients who are now adverse to one another. | 1/17/1985 |
0199
Print
|
| A lawyer may not serve both as the decedent's administrator and represent the decedent's widow charged with murdering the decedent. | 9/15/1969 |
1557
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent a minor in an action brought through a "next friend" even if the minor's interests may diverge from the next friend's interests, because there is no attorney-client relationship between the lawyer and the next friend (the lawyer must not allow the lawyer's duty to the minor to be compromised by directions from the next friend). | 10/20/1993 |
0289
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent a party challenging the adoption of the client's child while representing the other parent in a divorce proceeding against the person who wishes to adopt the child. | 12/22/1977 |
1013
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent a wife as plaintiff and four of her children (none of whom are minors) as defendants in a partition suit when all clients consent and they all "desire the same results" -- sale of the land with the proceeds divided equally among family members. | 12/10/1987 |
0916
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent an alleged criminal and (in unrelated matters), the alleged criminals' victim and a witness against the criminal as long as all clients consent. | 5/8/1987 |
0213
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent an insured in a personal injury action and the insurer on a subrogation claim against the same defendant as long as both the insurer and insured consent. | 8/14/1970 |
0580
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent both a corporation and a former employee on unrelated matters, but may not also represent either one in their dispute against the other. | 5/31/1984 |
1000
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction as long as both consent. The lawyer may not represent either party should a dispute later arise between them. | 11/12/1987 |
1398
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction if both consent. If the lawyer is related to the real estate agent and will be representing the buyer only, the buyer must consent (because of the relationship between the lawyer and the agent). | 2/15/1991 |
1223
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent both the driver and passengers in an accident in pursuing a product liability case as long as all clients consent after full disclosure. The lawyer should re-evaluate the representation if one of his clients indicates a desire to pursue a claim against another client. The lawyer may also represent the insurance carrier in a subrogation claim against the defendant as long as the clients consent after full disclosure. | 4/19/1989 |
0359
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent both the noteholder and act as trustee under a deed of trust if the maker consents [This LEO was vacated by LEO 824.] | 3/10/1980 |
0270
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent co-plaintiffs in a personal injury action despite a third-party action against just one of the plaintiffs. | 9/19/1975 |
0680
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent plaintiffs in a products liability action while also representing third-party defendants (distributors of the product) in a separate action -- as long as the two factual situations are unrelated (except as to the nature of injuries and alleged cause) and the lawyer has not gained any confidences from the distributor that could be used on the plaintiff's behalf. | 4/2/1985 |
0478
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent several creditors against a single debtor as long as all of the creditors consent and agree on the distribution of funds collected if they are inadequate to satisfy all creditors' claims. | 9/20/1982 |
1149
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction as long as both consent and are advised of their right to retain independent counsel. [The lawyer would not be able to represent either the buyer or the seller if adversity developed between them.] | 12/19/1988 |
1216
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction as long there is consent after full disclosure. Designating a place of settlement or the tendering of a deed on behalf of a party does not necessarily create an attorney-client relationship. [The lawyer almost surely could not represent either the buyer or the seller if adversity developed between them.] | 5/8/1989 |
0569
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent the husband in a divorce matter although the lawyer previously represented both the husband and wife in buying their home, unless in the earlier representation the lawyer learned confidences that could now be used against the wife. | 4/20/1984 |
0360
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent the insured in a personal injury case and the insurance carrier in the subrogation case against the tortfeasor as long as the insured and the insurer consent. | 3/10/1980 |
0620
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent three brothers in an accident case in which one of the brothers was driving and may have been at fault, as long as all three brothers consent and lawyer believes it is possible to adequately represent the interests of each brother. | 11/13/1984 |
0219
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent two clients in making a joint motion that assault charges filed by each against the other be dismissed, as long as the charges are likely to be dismissed and the lawyer has disclosed to the client that the lawyer must withdraw if both charges are not dismissed. | 10/24/1972 |
1590
Print
|
| A lawyer prepared a decedent's will creating two trusts -- for the decedent's son and daughter. The lawyer and the lawyer's wife (who is also a lawyer) serve as trustees for both trusts. After the decedent died, the son and daughter began to quarrel about the trusts. The lawyer represented the daughter in a suit against the son. Because the Code applies to the lawyers' conduct as trustees, the actual conflict between the son and the daughter precludes the lawyer and his wife from continuing to serve as trustees. | 4/11/1994 |
0553
Print
|
| A lawyer prepared real estate documents for both the buyer and seller, but merely memorialized what the parties had independently negotiated and agreed. The lawyer may now represent the buyer in an action brought by the seller. [This LEO may be incorrect -- normally a lawyer in this situation could not represent either client if a dispute arises between them.][Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 6/21/1983 |
0475
Print
|
| A lawyer represented a contractor and sub-contractor against a third party, but the two clients eventually quarreled. The lawyer must withdraw from representing the contractor and the subcontractor, but may continue to represent the contractor in the third party's counterclaim (because the lawyer would not be adverse to a former client or use its confidential information). | 9/20/1982 |
1499
Print
|
| A lawyer represented a corporation which had six shareholders. After the shareholders began to quarrel, one of the shareholders planned to sue the other shareholders (and perhaps the corporation as well). Assuming that the corporation's lawyer had not "met with or received confidences as to the corporation or otherwise" from the potential plaintiff shareholder, the lawyer may continue to represent the corporation and the four shareholders who might be sued. The lawyer must withdraw from representing both the shareholders and the corporation should a conflict develop between them. | 12/14/1992 |
1032
Print
|
| A lawyer represented a couple in the purchase and refinance of their home. The lawyer may now represent the husband in a divorce action because the lawyer has only public knowledge about the home transaction. Although the wife claims that the lawyer will be a witness to the transaction, the lawyer may continue to represent the husband unless it is obvious that the lawyer will be called as a witness and the lawyer's testimony is or may be prejudicial to the husband. | 2/2/1988 |
0291
Print
|
| A lawyer represented a driver and passenger in separate actions against another driver. The lawyer may not defend the client-driver in the third-party motion for judgment brought by the other driver, because the passenger might obtain a judgment against the other driver that ultimately would have to be collected from the lawyer's other client. | 3/6/1978 |
1296
Print
|
| A lawyer represented a husband and wife in preparing a contract for joint wills. After the husband dies, the wife's daughter tells the lawyer that her mother destroyed the contract and intends to prepare a new will in defiance of the contract.Because the lawyer was not representing the wife when this alleged activity took place, any fraud had not occurred "during the course of the representation" and the lawyer was therefore not governed by the Disciplinary Rule permitting disclosure of fraud on third parties that occurred during the course of the representation. | 10/25/1989 |
1279
Print
|
| A lawyer represented a husband in a child support matter. The husband's ex-wife later wanted to hire the lawyer in an action against another man for child support. One of the children's paternity was disputed, so the action could have adversely affected the lawyer's former client (the husband). The lawyer may represent the wife if the husband consents after full disclosure, but the lawyer may not represent either the wife or the former client husband should a conflict later arise. | 9/21/1989 |
1092
Print
|
| A lawyer represented a regional jail commission funded by the state, a county and two cities. One city appointed one of the five voting commissioners. The lawyer may represent a client in a civil rights case against the city's police department and a city police officer if the client and the jail commission consent. [The city's partial funding of the jail commission should not have made it a "client" for conflicts purposes.] | 6/16/1988 |
1134
Print
|
| A lawyer represented both the driver and a passenger in an automobile accident. When the driver was sued in a third-party motion for judgment, the lawyer withdrew from representing the driver. Once the passenger's case is settled, the lawyer may resume representation of the driver as long as the passenger consents after full disclosure. | 10/18/1988 |
1483
Print
|
| A lawyer represented five plaintiffs in obtaining five separate judgments against a defendant and his wife. Three of the plaintiffs wanted to jointly sue to enforce their judgments. An enforcement suit would begin a new representation, and therefore the lawyer was not obligated to represent all five of the original plaintiffs. However, the lawyer still must protect the five original plaintiffs' interests and should advise them of the enforcement procedures and any time limits. The lawyer may represent "several creditors against a single debtor provided that, after full disclosure to each creditor, all creditors consented to the multiple representation and concurred as to the distribution of any funds collected should the amount be inadequate to pay fully each creditor's claim." | 9/1/1992 |
0719
Print
|
| A lawyer represented four clients in automobile accident case, but one of the clients ends the representation and hires another lawyer. One of the remaining clients later tells the lawyer that the former client was not injured in the accident and is attempting to defraud the carrier (thus reducing the compensation available to the three remaining clients). If the lawyer continues to represent the three clients, the lawyer must advise all of them of this possible fraud because the fraud "would deplete the fund from which your continuing clients might recover" (because the lawyer learned about the possible fraud after the representation of the claimant ended, the lawyer has no duty to keep the information secret). | 8/30/1985 |
0346
Print
|
| A lawyer represented three defendants in an automobile accident case, and was successful in a demurrer. The plaintiff later sued one of the defendants, and the lawyer represented that defendant in settling the case. The lawyer may not now be adverse to that defendant on behalf of another defendant. | 12/4/1979 |
1091
Print
|
| A lawyer represented two clients (who were formerly married) in an IRS dispute. A later rules change creates a defense available to one of the clients, but not the other. If both clients consent after full disclosure, the lawyer may assert the defense on behalf of one of the clients. Otherwise, the lawyer would have to withdraw. | 6/14/1988 |
1731
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a client (in a criminal matter in which sentencing is pending) who admits that she just gave police a false identification (using her girlfriend's driver's license) while being arrested for driving while intoxicated: may not reveal the client's fraud on the third party (because it does not involve the subject matter of the representation); cannot represent (even with consent) both the client and her girlfriend because of the "inherent and direct conflict" between them; must abide by the client's decision if she is determined to remain silent about the incident on the court date for the driving arrest; may continue to represent the client in the sentencing phase of the original criminal matter but "must be careful not to mislead the court in any statements"; may not invite the court in the sentencing hearing to ask questions that would elicit information about the driving arrest incident; may not withdraw from representing the client in the underlying criminal matter because it would prejudice the client (by prompting the court to ask about the withdrawal); must advise the client of the risk that the lawyer might be obligated to reveal the driving arrest incident if asked direct questions by the court at the sentencing hearing. | 6/29/1999 |
0332
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a contractor and performing real estate closings should withdraw if any conflicts arise. | 11/26/1979 |
1340
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a corporation may also represent two of its employees in an action against a third party. If the employees wish to assign part of their recovery to the corporation, the lawyer must obtain consent from all three clients and be able to adequately represent the interests of each in negotiating the assignment. | 4/20/1990 |
0400
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a corporation with two shareholders may not represent either shareholder if they become adverse. | 1/19/1981 |
1312
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a defendant in a personal injury case may also represent a hospital (which had earlier treated the plaintiff in an unrelated matter), because the hospital could not be named as a third-party defendant and because the earlier treatment was unrelated to the current litigation. However, both the defendant and the hospital must consent after full disclosure. | 5/8/1990 |
1436
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a lender who sends documents to the borrower for signature should advise the borrower that the lawyer is representing the lender. Because the lawyer should not give any legal advice to non-clients, the lawyer is not required to advise the borrower of the opportunity to purchase title insurance. If the lawyer is to represent the borrower and lender, the lawyer must advise the borrower (and obtain the borrower's consent) if the lawyer serves on the lender's board of directors. If the lawyer represents both the borrower and lender, the lawyer should advise the borrower about the availability of title insurance. | 11/1/1991 |
0372
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a purchaser in a real estate transaction may act as joint escrow agent if the purchaser and seller consent. | 5/15/1980 |
1377
Print
|
| A lawyer representing a trucking company and driver in a wrongful death case learns that the driver has had a number of earlier tickets, and there is a dispute about whether the driver reported the tickets to the trucking company. The lawyer has withdrawn from representing the driver but wants to continue representing the company. The lawyer could do so only with the driver's consent, because the lawyer had earlier represented the driver. | 9/13/1990 |
1304
Print
|
| A lawyer representing an ex-wife in a custody matter may not also represent the ex-wife and child in a criminal matter (because the custody dispute relates to the mother's lack of parental supervision). It is not obvious that the lawyer could adequately represent both the ex-wife and the child, and consent is impossible because the minor child could not consent. | 11/21/1989 |
1599
Print
|
| A lawyer representing an executor and one of two beneficiaries: does not have a conflict unless the lawyer also represents the other beneficiary; must advise the client that communications with the client as beneficiary may not be entitled to attorney-client privilege protection, because communications with the client as fiduciary may similarly not be protected from disclosure to the beneficiaries; has "no attorney-client relationship with the beneficiaries of the estate other than the executor;" has no "derivative duty" to the other beneficiary by virtue of the client's fiduciary duty (as executor) to the other beneficiary, although the lawyer must "be alert to indications that [the other beneficiary] does not understand the attorney's role;" may not advise or represent the executor in actions that breach the executor's fiduciary duty; does "not take on the executor's duties to the beneficiaries simply by performing the executor's administrative tasks;" may not charge for any services rendered to the client in the client's capacity as a beneficiary. | 8/12/1994 |
1022
Print
|
| A lawyer representing both a real estate buyer and seller may not later represent one against the other without consent. A lawyer representing a borrower may serve as a trustee under a deed of trust without obtaining the borrower's consent if the lawyer "has in no way advised or counseled" the borrower about the deed of trust or note and did not continue a relationship with the borrower after closing. In such circumstances, the lawyer may also foreclose without obtaining the borrower's consent. (Adopted 3/8/88; effective 5/24/88) | 5/24/1988 |
0414
Print
|
| A lawyer representing both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction may not represent either one in a later dispute. | 5/20/1981 |
0528
Print
|
| A lawyer representing both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction may not represent one against the other in a later dispute, or foreclose on the deed of trust (unless the clients consent). [This Opinion was vacated by LEO 824.] | 9/13/1983 |
1435
Print
|
| A lawyer representing both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction must advise both clients that "he will not be able to represent either party against the other if a dispute should arise." The lawyer may testify on behalf of one of the parties if the other former client consents or the court orders it. | 11/18/1991 |
0895
Print
|
| A lawyer representing grandparents with custody of a child may not represent the child's mother if her interests are adverse to those of the grandparents. It is proper to represent multiple clients if their interests are not adverse and if all clients consent. | 4/1/1987 |
0703
Print
|
| A lawyer representing one of two criminal defendants being tried separately can testify at the other defendant's trial about a conversation in which the lawyer participated. | 5/24/1985 |
0616
Print
|
| A lawyer representing several insureds may not arrange an aggregate settlement to which one of the clients objects; the lawyer must withdraw from the representation if a conflict develops between insured and insurer. | 11/13/1984 |
1547
Print
|
| A lawyer representing the administrator of a decedent's estate (who is also a potential wrongful death beneficiary) may not also represent other purported relatives, because the administrator and the other purported relatives take differing positions on the decedent's paternity. The conflict cannot be cured by disclosure and consent. The lawyer representing the defendant may contact the purported relatives ex parte because they are not currently represented by counsel. The defendant's lawyer may not give any advice "other than the advice to secure counsel," and "may not state or imply that he is disinterested in the matter." | 8/12/1993 |
0327
Print
|
| A lawyer representing two clients with a direct conflict in a case scheduled for trial should advise the court. | 6/14/1979 |
1457
Print
|
| A lawyer represents a condominium board. During the deposition preparation of one board member (the board's former president), the lawyer learns that the president exceeded the president's authority and contributed to the injury of which plaintiff complains. The lawyer must advise the former president to seek independent counsel. The lawyer may not continue to prepare the former president for the deposition because the former president and the condominium board have conflicting interests which cannot be cured by consent. The lawyer may not tell the condominium board what the former president has told the lawyer, unless the lawyer had earlier advised the former president that the lawyer represented the condominium board and not the president, and that any information divulged during the deposition preparation would be shared with the board. Although the lawyer had no attorney-client relationship with the former president, absent such disclaimer the meeting "created an expectation of confidentiality which must be protected by the attorney." The opinion seems to indicate that the lawyer may also find it nearly impossible to continue representing the condominium board, because the lawyer cannot both represent the condominium board and protect the confidences of the former president. [Rule 1.13 provides guidance for lawyers who represent organizations and face this situation. The litigation in this opinion was pending in D.C. so under Rule 8.5 the D.C. court's ethics rules would now govern this situation.] | 4/13/1992 |
1505
Print
|
| A lawyer represents both a corporation and its chairman (who is sued in both individual and fiduciary capacities). On appeal, the plaintiff raised issues outside the record that hurt the chairman. The chairman wants the lawyer to correct the statements, but the lawyer refuses to do so because it might hurt the corporation. Because there is an actual conflict between the corporation and the chairman, the lawyer must withdraw from representing both. Because it is obvious that the lawyer may not adequately represent the interests of the corporation and the chairman, consent would not cure the conflict. [The Bar's conclusion that consent would not cure this conflict almost surely would be different under Rule 1.7(a)'s "reasonably believes" subjective standard rather than the old Code's "obvious" standard.] | 12/14/1992 |
1427
Print
|
| A lawyer represents two clients in a real estate matter. One of the clients is indicted on criminal charges, and wants to retain the lawyer on that matter. The other client is an alleged co-conspirator. The lawyer may not represent the criminal defendant if the criminal matter is related to the real estate matter. | 9/16/1991 |
0986
Print
|
| A lawyer represents two criminal co-defendants. Just before trial, the Commonwealth's Attorney offers to plea bargain with one if that defendant will testify against the other. The lawyer drops the representation of the defendant receiving the offer. The lawyer later learns that the former client intends to testify against the continuing client and has also shared the lawyer's work product with the Commonwealth's Attorney. Although the continuing client insists that the lawyer continue the representation, the lawyer must withdraw. The Bar found nothing wrong with the Commonwealth's Attorney interviewing the former client (before the client has a new lawyer) and obtaining the former lawyer's work product from the former client. [This LEO was overruled by LEO 1702, which would prohibit the lawyer from obtaining or learning the substance of the work product.] | 10/27/1987 |
1206
Print
|
| A lawyer serving as the executor of an estate and representing three children in an action filed by a fourth may represent all of the children in an unrelated real estate transaction if all consent. | 4/3/1989 |
0267
Print
|
| A lawyer who filed a specific performance suit against the seller on behalf of the realtor and prospective buyer may continue to represent the realtor after the buyer and seller settle their dispute (as long as the former buyer-client consents). | 8/13/1975 |
0849
Print
|
| A lawyer who has served as a mediator may not represent either party in the same matter. | 10/9/1986 |
0774
Print
|
| A lawyer who represented a husband and wife in arranging for a second mortgage on their home may then represent the husband in preparing a property settlement agreement during a no-fault divorce, as long as the lawyer did not learn any relevant confidences during the earlier joint representation. | 3/11/1986 |
0766
Print
|
| A lawyer who represented a husband and wife in child support litigation against the wife's former husband may now represent the husband in a divorce case (and a custody matter involving a different child) if the lawyer did not obtain confidential information in the course of the earlier joint representation. | 1/17/1986 |
0744
Print
|
| A lawyer who represented both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction may not initiate foreclosure proceedings as trustee. A lawyer with whom the lawyer later merged must likewise withdraw from representing the buyer or seller in their dispute. | 4/17/1986 |
0656
Print
|
| A lawyer who represented both the buyer and seller in a real estate transaction may not later represent one in an action against the other, unless both consent. | 1/21/1985 |
0677
Print
|
| A lawyer who represented both the husband and wife in drafting a property settlement and giving legal advice about it may not now represent the wife in a divorce action. Likewise, the husband may not be represented by another lawyer with whom the first lawyer shares office space and secretarial help. | 4/2/1985 |
1681
Print
|
| A lawyer who represents a lender in closing residential loans (often at the recommendation of the builder) may not represent a borrower in litigation against the builder, because: (1) the lawyer is administering settlement funds on behalf of other borrowers that the client could use to satisfy the client's claim against the builder; and (2) the lawyer is privy to confidential information about funds owed to or to be disbursed to the builder. Once the lawyer stops representing the borrower in the action against the builder, the lawyer may continue to handle other closings on behalf of other borrowers. | 5/16/1996 |
1551
Print
|
| A lawyer who represents companies that compete with a company employing the lawyer's non-lawyer fiancé may continue to represent the clients as long as they are only adverse "in a business setting" to the fiancé's employer and "unless and until any two or more clients become adverse to each other in legal matters." Any disqualification of the lawyer based on the engagement is not imputed to the other lawyers in the firm. | 10/20/1993 |
1585
Print
|
| A Virginia lawyer acts as a Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee for a corporation and related individuals. Although the trustee does not act as a lawyer, the trustee must comply with the Virginia Code. Therefore, the trustee must resign as trustee for both the corporation and the individuals when it becomes apparent that the corporation has a claim against the individuals. | 6/14/1994 |
0786
Print
|
| A widow and her minor children have a potential interest in a partition suit. The widow's claim has been challenged because she allegedly deserted her husband (the deceased beneficiary). A lawyer may not represent both the widow and the children, because there is a potential adversity between them. The children are not capable of giving consent, so the lawyer may not represent the widow. However, if the widow consents, the lawyer may represent the children. | 5/27/1986 |
0770
Print
|
| Absent consent, a lawyer may not represent a wife in a divorce action when the lawyer had previously represented both the husband and wife with regard to marital property. | 3/11/1986 |
1089
Print
|
| Absent consent, a lawyer who represented a buyer and seller in a closing may not represent one against the other in a dispute about the closing. | 6/8/1988 |
1634
Print
|
| An accounting firm whose principal is a lawyer-accountant prepared joint returns for a client and the client's spouse. The couple has now separated. Because the Code applies when the lawyer is "functioning in the dual capacity as an attorney and an accountant," the former spouse is considered a former client, and the lawyer may not be adverse to the former spouse without consent. | 2/22/1995 |
0191
Print
|
| An insurance carrier's lawyer may represent a client on a subrogation claim and the insured seeking to recover the deductible as long as the insured consents. | 1/23/1963 |
0464
Print
|
| As long as all clients consent, a lawyer may conduct a "dry closing." | 9/20/1982 |
0379
Print
|
| As long as all clients consent, a lawyer may represent more than one plaintiff in an action against the same defendant in the same automobile accident (even though the defendant has filed a third-party motion for judgment against one of the plaintiffs). | 8/11/1981 |
0511
Print
|
| As long as both clients consent, a lawyer may provide "legal information" (as opposed to "legal advice") to both a husband and wife involved in a divorce mediation. [Rule 2.11 deals with lawyers acting as mediators.] [In LEO 1759, the Bar reaffirmed that a lawyer/mediator may not later represent a party to the mediation, even with client consent.] | 4/28/1983 |
0640
Print
|
| As long as both defendants consent, a lawyer may represent two defendants even though they had previously been in litigation against each other arising out of the same matter. | 12/19/1984 |
0492
Print
|
| As long as both the husband and wife consent, a lawyer may draft a child support agreement and give non-partisan advice as long as the lawyer is not negotiating the matter and simply memorializing the agreement already reached. [This LEO was effectively overruled by Rule 2.2(d).] | 3/3/1982 |
1210
Print
|
| As long as the clients consent, a law firm may both represent a creditor causing the issuance of garnishments and the company to whom the garnishments are addressed. If a dispute arises between the two clients, the lawyer may not represent either one. | 4/26/1989 |
0235
Print
|
| As long as they do not represent the banks as advocates or counsel, members of the same firm may serve as directors of competing banks. | 1/3/1974 |
1776
Print
|
| Each jurisdiction's Public Defender and each jurisdiction's Capital Defense Unit should be considered separate legal entities for conflicts purposes, because each office acts independently, has a secure computer system and bears none of the indicia of offices in a multi-office law firm. Although a single state Commission oversees all of the offices, this fact should not result in a presumption that information in one office is shared with other offices. A Public Defender in an office may represent a capital defendant in a matter adverse to a client formerly represented by another lawyer in that office, "unless the defense of the current client would require the use of [protected] information obtained in the representation of the former client." | 5/19/2003 |
1096
Print
|
| If both clients consent, a lawyer may represent a county's Department of Social Services while simultaneously representing parents being prosecuted by the Department in unrelated matters. | 6/16/1988 |
1075
Print
|
| If both spouses consent, a lawyer retained by a husband to draft a separation agreement (which both spouses have signed) may now represent the wife in an uncontested divorce. | 5/4/1988 |
0728
Print
|
| If both the husband and wife consent, a lawyer may represent both of them in preparing wills that preclude changing beneficiaries following the death of the first to die. | 11/11/1985 |
0518
Print
|
| If the client consents, a lawyer may represent an indigent person in criminal cases even though the lawyer also represents the county and the county's law enforcement officers. | 5/2/1983 |
1508
Print
|
| In a Superfund case, the court had entered an order under which every defendant was deemed to have cross-claimed against every other defendant. Lawyers representing more than one defendant have "opted out" of this order. Because the multiple clients have "potentially" differing interests, a lawyer may represent more than one defendant only with consent. If the "potentially differing interests mature into actual adverse interests," it may be necessary for the lawyer to withdraw from representing all the clients. | 8/12/1993 |
1426
Print
|
| It is per se improper for a lawyer to represent the criminal defendant, the victim and the victim's mother (the defendant's wife). Because it is not "obvious" that the lawyer may adequately represent the interests of all of these clients, the conflict cannot be cured by consent. Rule 1.7(a)(1) follows a subjective "reasonably believes" standard rather than the old Code's objective "obvious" standard.] | 9/16/1991 |
0779
Print
|
| Law firms representing a state political subdivision developing an industrial park and issuing industrial revenue bonds may also serve as bond counsel for the lender and represent a developer (the applicant for the bonds), because the clients are sophisticated "users of money and legal services" and their interests are not inconsistent. | 4/14/1986 |
0231
Print
|
| Members of the same firm may represent competing banks if there is no "formal controversy" between the banks, and both banks are "aware of the situation and have made no objection to it." | 12/28/1973 |
0210
Print
|
| Partners of the same firm may act as directors and lawyers of competing banks (although the firm could not represent either bank if the banks' legal interests conflict). | 2/19/1971 |
0299
Print
|
| Same Opinion as 291. | 3/6/1978 |
0516
Print
|
| Same Opinion as LEO 511 and 513. | 4/28/1983 |
0513
Print
|
| Same Opinion as LEO 511. | 4/28/1983 |
1472
Print
|
| The lawyer for a divorced wife may not represent the estate of the former husband. | 8/24/1992 |
0424
Print
|
| The same lawyer may represent both the seller's real estate agent and the purchaser in an action for breach of contract against the seller, but must be ready to withdraw if the ability to adequately represent both clients becomes impaired. | 8/14/1981 |
1473
Print
|
| Three co-executors each hired their own lawyer and a fourth lawyer to represent the estate. The fourth lawyer had an attorney-client relationship with all three executors. The executors later became trustees, and began to quarrel. The fourth lawyer may not continue to represent two of the executor/ trustees unless the third one consented. | 9/1/1992 |
1244
Print
|
| Two partners began to represent adverse parties in a personal injury action without realizing it. When the adversity came to light, one of the partners withdrew from representing the prospective defendant with the defendant's consent. The files of this brief representation were sealed and the lawyer did not discuss it with the lawyer who withdrew. As long as the plaintiff consents, the other partner may continue to represent the plaintiff as along as the lawyer had not obtained any confidential information from the partner who had to drop a client. | 6/13/1989 |
0263
Print
|
| Unless both clients consent, a lawyer may not continue to represent a plaintiff in a personal injury action when a partner unknowingly began to represent the defendant in connection with the related traffic charge, even if the partner withdraws from representing the defendant upon learning of the partner's representation of the plaintiff. | 6/23/1975 |