This is due to the conflict of interest that arises when an attorney's duty to a client conflicts with his duty to another. However, there are exceptions and specific circumstances where it may be allowed, as described in legal regulations such as Rules 1 and 7 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct. This is because the lawyer has the same duty of loyalty to each client, and each client has the right to be informed of anything related to representation that may affect the interests of that client and the right to expect that the lawyer will use that information for the benefit of that client. Therefore, the lawyer does not usually need that person's consent before representing a client who is suing the person for an unrelated matter.
The written requirement does not preclude the need, in most cases, for the lawyer to speak with the client to explain the risks and benefits, if any, of representation burdened by a conflict of interest, as well as the reasonably available alternatives, and to provide the client with a reasonable opportunity to consider risks and alternatives and to raise questions and concerns. When an insurance company and its insured are parties to an action, an attorney who is a full-time employee of the insurance company cannot represent both the insurance company and the insured because of the dilution of liability to the insured created by the employment relationship between the lawyer and the insurance company. Other relevant factors are whether the lawyer will subsequently represent both parties on an ongoing basis and whether the situation involves creating or terminating a relationship between the parties. An attorney who holds shares in a mortgage brokerage corporation cannot act as a liquidating agent for a loan negotiated by the corporation, nor can the firm's other attorneys certify ownership or act as a liquidating agent.
for closing. An attorney can represent several claimants in a personal injury case, even though the available insurance income is insufficient to fully compensate all claimants, provided that each claimant, or their legal representative, gives informed consent to the representation and the attorney does not defend the interests of any client in dividing insurance income. For example, the lawyer may reasonably conclude that failure to disclose a client's trade secrets to another client will not negatively affect the representation that a joint venture involves between clients and agree to keep that information confidential with the informed consent of both clients. When the attorney represents more than one client, the issue of consent must be resolved in relation to each client.
The public defender's office should be considered as a single law firm, and staff attorneys cannot represent co-defendants with conflicting interests unless both give their consent and can be properly represented. For the purposes of a real estate transaction, an attorney can, with due notice to the borrower, represent only the lender, and the lender can prepare closing documents. An attorney can represent an insured in a bad faith action against their insurer for non-payment of a liability claim filed by a claimant who is represented by the same attorney. The possibility of a conflict of interest arising when representing several defendants in a criminal case is so serious that, in general, an attorney should refuse to represent more than one co-defendant.
An attorney cannot issue an opinion on a person's property title and then represent another person in a boundary dispute against that person. person. An attorney cannot defend an action brought by a previous client when confidential information obtained during the previous representation would be relevant to the defense of the current action. If there is a significant risk of material limitation, and without the informed consent of affected clients, the attorney must reject one of the statements or withdraw from one or both of the issues.
