Comment
Confirmed in
Writing
[1] If it is
not feasible to
obtain or transmit a
written confirmation
at the time the
client gives
informed consent,
then the lawyer must
obtain or transmit
it within a
reasonable time
thereafter. If a
lawyer has obtained
a client's informed
consent, the lawyer
may act in reliance
on that consent so
long as it is
confirmed in writing
within a reasonable
time thereafter.
Firm
[2] Whether
two or more lawyers
constitute a firm
within paragraph (c)
can depend on the
specific facts. For
example, two
practitioners who
share office space
and occasionally
consult or assist
each other
ordinarily would not
be regarded as
constituting a firm.
However, if they
present themselves
to the public in a
way that suggests
that they are a firm
or conduct
themselves as a
firm, they should be
regarded as a firm
for purposes of the
Rules. The terms of
any formal agreement
between associated
lawyers are relevant
in determining
whether they are a
firm, as is the fact
that they have
mutual access to
information
concerning the
clients they serve.
Furthermore, it is
relevant in doubtful
cases to consider
the underlying
purpose of the Rule
that is involved. A
group of lawyers
could be regarded as
a firm for purposes
of the Rule that the
same lawyer should
not represent
opposing parties in
litigation, while it
might not be so
regarded for
purposes of the Rule
that information
acquired by one
lawyer is attributed
to another.
[3] With respect to the law department of an organization, including the government, there is ordinarily no question that the members of the department constitute a firm within the meaning of the Rules of Professional Conduct. There can be uncertainty, however, as to the identity of the client. For example, it may not be clear whether the law department of a corporation represents a subsidiary or an affiliated corporation, as well as the corporation by which the members of the department are directly employed. A similar question can arise concerning an unincorporated association and its local affiliates.
[4] Similar questions can also arise with respect to lawyers in legal aid and legal services organizations. Depending upon the structure of the organization, the entire organization or different components of it may constitute a firm or firms for purposes of these Rules.
Fraud
[5] When used
in these Rules, the
terms "fraud" or
"fraudulent" refer
to conduct that is
characterized as
such under the
substantive or
procedural law of
the applicable
jurisdiction and has
a purpose to
deceive. This does
not include merely
negligent
misrepresentation or
negligent failure to
apprise another of
relevant
information. For
purposes of these
Rules, it is not
necessary that
anyone has suffered
damages or relied on
the
misrepresentation or
failure to inform.
Informed Consent
[6] Many of
the Rules of
Professional Conduct
require the lawyer
to obtain the
informed consent of
a client or other
person (e.g., a
former client or,
under certain
circumstances, a
prospective client)
before accepting or
continuing
representation or
pursuing a course of
conduct. See, e.g.,
Rules 1.2(c), 1.6(a)
and 1.7(b). The
communication
necessary to obtain
such consent will
vary according to
the Rule involved
and the
circumstances giving
rise to the need to
obtain informed
consent. The lawyer
must make reasonable
efforts to ensure
that the client or
other person
possesses
information
reasonably adequate
to make an informed
decision.
Ordinarily, this
will require
communication that
includes a
disclosure of the
facts and
circumstances giving
rise to the
situation, any
explanation
reasonably necessary
to inform the client
or other person of
the material
advantages and
disadvantages of the
proposed course of
conduct and a
discussion of the
client's or other
person's options and
alternatives. In
some circumstances
it may be
appropriate for a
lawyer to advise a
client or other
person to seek the
advice of other
counsel. A lawyer
need not inform a
client or other
person of facts or
implications already
known to the client
or other person;
nevertheless, a
lawyer who does not
personally inform
the client or other
person assumes the
risk that the client
or other person is
inadequately
informed and the
consent is invalid.
In determining
whether the
information and
explanation provided
are reasonably
adequate, relevant
factors include
whether the client
or other person is
experienced in legal
matters generally
and in making
decisions of the
type involved, and
whether the client
or other person is
independently
represented by other
counsel in giving
the consent.
Normally, such
persons need less
information and
explanation than
others, and
generally a client
or other person who
is independently
represented by other
counsel in giving
the consent should
be assumed to have
given informed
consent.
[7] Obtaining informed consent will usually require an affirmative response by the client or other person. In general, a lawyer may not assume consent from a client's or other person's silence. Consent may be inferred, however, from the conduct of a client or other person who has reasonably adequate information about the matter. A number of Rules require that a person's consent be confirmed in writing. See Rules 1.7(b) and 1.9(a). For a definition of "writing" and "confirmed in writing," see paragraphs (n) and (b). Other Rules require that a client's consent be obtained in a writing signed by the client. See, e.g., Rules 1.8(a) and (g). For a definition of "signed," see paragraph (n).
Screened
[8]
This definition
applies to
situations where
screening of a
personally
disqualified lawyer
is permitted to
remove imputation of
a conflict of
interest under Rules
1.10, 1.11, 1.12 or
1.18.
[9] The purpose of screening is to assure the affected parties that confidential information known by the personally disqualified lawyer remains protected. The personally disqualified lawyer should acknowledge the obligation not to communicate with any of the other lawyers in the firm with respect to the matter. Similarly, other lawyers in the firm who are working on the matter should be informed that the screening is in place and that they may not communicate with the personally disqualified lawyer with respect to the matter. Additional screening measures that are appropriate for the particular matter will depend on the circumstances. To implement, reinforce and remind all affected lawyers of the presence of the screening, it may be appropriate for the firm to undertake such procedures as a written undertaking by the screened lawyer to avoid any communication with other firm personnel and any contact with any firm files or other materials relating to the matter, written notice and instructions to all other firm personnel forbidding any communication with the screened lawyer relating to the matter, denial of access by the screened lawyer to firm files or other materials relating to the matter and periodic reminders of the screen to the screened lawyer and all other firm personnel.
[10] In order to be effective, screening measures must be implemented as soon as practical after a lawyer or law firm knows or reasonably should know that there is a need for screening.