Attorney G is a solo practitioner. Her cousin, Mr. H, asks Attorney G to represent him in a divorce proceeding. Mr. H's wife is a close friend of Attorney G's partner, Ms. I, who is also a solo practitioner but shares office space and administrative staff with Attorney G. Attorney G is aware that Ms. I has a strong personal dislike for Mr. H due to a past business dispute between Mr. H and Ms. I's brother. What is Attorney G's ethical obligation?
- AAttorney G may represent Mr. H if she is confident she can maintain her independent professional judgment.
- BAttorney G can represent Mr. H without disclosing the issue, as Ms. I is not directly involved in the representation.
- CAttorney G may represent Mr. H if she informs him of the potential conflict and he gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.
- DAttorney G must decline representation due to the significant risk that her judgment will be materially limited by her partner's personal feelings.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. Attorney G must decline representation due to the significant risk that her judgment will be materially limited by her partner's personal feelings.
This scenario presents a material limitation conflict under Rule 1.7(a)(2). Attorney G's ability to represent her cousin may be materially limited by her 'personal interest' (her close relationship with Ms. I and Ms. I's strong dislike for Mr. H). While the rule generally allows for consent, the Comment to Rule 1.7 states that 'when a disinterested lawyer would conclude that the client should not agree to the representation under the circumstances, the lawyer involved cannot properly ask for such agreement or provide representation on the basis of the client's consent.' Here, Ms. I's strong personal dislike and shared office space create a high risk of material limitation that a disinterested lawyer would likely deem non-consentable, making declining representation the most prudent and ethical choice.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. Confidence in one's own judgment is insufficient if an objective standard suggests material limitation.
- B. Disclosure is always required for conflicts; proceeding without it is a clear violation.
- C. While consent is generally possible for material limitation conflicts, this specific situation likely falls under the 'non-consentable conflict' category where a reasonable lawyer would advise against consent.
Material Limitation Conflict (Non-Consentable Personal Interest)
A conflict where a lawyer's representation of a client may be materially limited by the lawyer's own personal interests, or the interests of a third party. Such conflicts can sometimes be waived with informed consent, but some are non-consentable if a disinterested lawyer would conclude the client should not agree.
- Arises when lawyer's judgment is limited by personal interests.
- Also applies to duties to other clients, former clients, or third persons.
- Requires reasonable belief of competent representation AND informed consent (written).
- Some conflicts are non-consentable, even with client consent.
Memory trick: Disinterested Decisions Determine Denials, Despite Desires.