An attorney representing a local water utility seeks to get easements signed to move a water main that currently runs through his back yard. He needs water main moved because he needs to construct a new septic system in his back yard. He could pay for the new water main himself and affect no other property owner in the area, but instead is attempting to get easements that would allow placement of new water main through several other property owners lots paid for by the water utility.
2006-08-12 05:53:45 · 6 answers · asked by perdidobums 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The key to analyzing a conflict of interest is determining if (1) the situation requires the lawyer to owe a duty of professional conduct to two adverse interests/clients, or (2) the lawyer has personal interests that are intertwined or potentially adverse to their duty to a client, or (3) the situation is one where the lawyer's independent professional judgment would be impaired because of personal interests/objections.
The lawyer here is representing the water utility company. He also has a personal interest in moving the water main.
If the utility company is seeking the same goal, and has the same interests, then it might not be a conflict of interest, unless the stress of the situation causes a loss of independent professional judgment.
If the utility company has a different goal, then his personal interests may be either in conflict with that goal, or at most might distract him from that goal.
A good attorney always needs to evaluate the effects of any representation and his personal interests, and assess how those factors affect his independent professional judgment. Then determine, based on the ethical rules in his state, whether to withdraw or not.
Most states follow some variant of the ABA Model Rules (not the Canons anymore). California has their own Rules of Professional Conduct, which are similar to the ABA Model Rules but organized differently. In the end, only the attorney or the bar review board can determine if there is an actual conflict.
2006-08-12 07:41:57 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It would be a conflict if his actions would cause greater expense to the utility. However, it is the kind of conflict that can be waived if the utility chooses to do so. In waiving, the utility, however, may have a conflict with its shareholders (if private) or the government entity that owns it, by agreeing to the added expense .
2006-08-12 06:59:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe this is a definite conflict. The key, in my mind, is if there is any benefit to the attorney, he must let another attorney handle the situation. But when in doubt, you can always present the situation to the Ethics Commission and they can tell you.
2006-08-12 05:59:33 · answer #3 · answered by Carla&Len C 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
a lawyer should exercise independent professional judgment on behalf of a client.
the ethical considerations to canon 5 states--the professional judgment of a lawyer should be exercised, within the bounds of the law,solely for the benefit of the client and free of compromising influences and loyalties, neither his personal interest, the interest of other clients, nor the desires of third persons should be permitted to dilute his loyalty to his client.
sounds like he has a personal interest so yes it would be a conflict of interest...
2006-08-12 07:08:09 · answer #4 · answered by stanyazfan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's only a conflict if he is in any way the City Attorney.
His occupation doesn't matter if he isn't the City Attorney.
2006-08-12 05:59:14 · answer #5 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
YES!!!
2006-08-12 06:54:26 · answer #6 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋