Conflicts of Interest

Question 1

What can L NOT do now that he has spoken with A?

(ignore subsequent representation)

Answer 1

Question 2

What would prevent L from representing C?

Answer 2

Question 3

What would prevent L from representing C?

Answer 3

Question 4

What would prevent L from representing C?

Answer 4

Question 5

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 5

Question 6

Can an affected client give consent to cure 1.10 imputed DQ?

Answer 6

Yes, but must be consent as under 1.7:

Reasonably believes representation of both will be competent and diligent
Not prohibited by law
Not one client against another in the same litigation, AND
Each affected client gives informed, written consent

Question 7

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 7

Question 8

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 8

Question 9

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 9

Question 10

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 10

Question 11

What would have to be true for L to represent A at the firm?

Answer 11

Question 12

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 12

Question 13

What would have to be true for L to represent A at the firm?

Answer 13

The information L has about B would have to NOT be used to B’s disadvantage in the representation.

Question 14

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 14

L would have to be screened.

Question 15

What kind of matters can L NOT work on now that she’s at the gov’t?

Answer 15

Any matter:

(1) With a 1.7 concurrent client conflict
(2) With 1.9 former client conflict
(3) Connected to something he was personally and substantially involved with at the Firm, unless the gov’t agency consents

Question 16

What would have to be true for X to NOT be DQ?

Answer 16

X is NOT DQ — no imputed DQ for firm–>gov’t DQ. Although, the comments of MR 1.11 suggest that screening would be prudent.