1-6
7-12
13-18
19-24
25-30
31-36
37-42
43-48
49-54
55-60
61-66
67-72
73-78
79-84
85-90
91-96
97-102
103-108
109-114
115-120
121-126
127-132
133-138
139
1-6
7-12
13-18
19-24
25-30
31-36
37-42
43-48
49-54
55-60
61-66
67-72
73-78
79-84
85-90
91-96
97-102
103-108
109-114
115-120
121-126
127-132
133-138
139
SCOPE OF THE REPRESENTATION AND THE ALLOCATION OF
AUTHORITY BETWEEN THE LAWYER AND CLIENT
objectives of the representation and may take such action on behalf of the client as is impliedly
authorized to carry out the representation
A lawyer shall abide by a client's decision whether to
settle a matter. In a criminal case, the lawyer shall abide by the client's decision as to a plea to be
entered, whether to waive jury trial, and whether the client will testify.
constitute an endorsement of the client's political, economic, social or moral views or activities.
scope of a client’s representation if the limitation is reasonable under the
circumstances and the client gives consent, preferably in writing, after consultation.
or reasonably should know is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal
consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to
make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law.
[1] Both lawyer and client have authority and responsibility in the objectives and means of
representation. The client has ultimate authority to determine the purposes to be served by legal
representation, within the limits imposed by law and the lawyer's professional obligations. Also, the
decisions specified in paragraph (a), such as whether to settle a civil matter, must be made by the
client. Other decisions may be made by the lawyer pursuant to the lawyer’s implied authority to
take action necessary to carry out the representation, subject to the lawyer’s duty to keep the client
reasonably informed about the status of the representation. See Rule 1.4.A clear distinction
between objectives and means sometimes cannot be drawn, and in many cases the client-lawyer
relationship partakes of a joint undertaking. In questions of means, for example, the lawyer
normally will assume responsibility for technical and legal tactical issues, but usually will defer to
the client regarding such questions as the expense to be incurred and concern for third persons who
might be adversely affected. Law defining the lawyer's scope of authority in litigation varies among
jurisdictions.
[2] Paragraph (a) recognizes that clients normally defer to the special knowledge and skill
of their lawyer. At the same time, a lawyer is not required to pursue objectives or employ means
simply because a client may instruct the lawyer do so. Although a lawyer, as an agent, normally
must abide by the client’s instructions with respect to the representation, a lawyer may always
refuse to engage in conduct that the lawyer reasonably believes to be unlawful or prohibited by the
Rules of Professional Conduct and may take action that the lawyer reasonably believes to be
required by law or the Rules of Professional Conduct. Also, if a lawyer has a fundamental
disagreement with the client about the client’s objectives or the means to be used to accomplish
them, the lawyer may withdraw from the representation. See Rule 1.16.
[3] Communication between the lawyer and the client is necessary for the client to
effectively participate in decisions relating to client’s representation. The lawyer must, therefore,
1.4.
[4] At the outset of a representation, the client may authorize the lawyer to take action on the
client’s behalf without further consultation. Ordinarily, a lawyer may rely on such an advance
authorization. The client may, however, revoke such authority at any time, and a lawyer may not
rely on an advance authorization if there has been such a material change in the circumstances
known to the lawyer that the client’s prior authorization can no longer be regarded as an adequately
informed decision.
[5]In a case in which the client appears to be suffering mental disability, the lawyer's duty
to abide by the client's decisions is to be guided by reference to Rule 1.14.
[6] Legal representation should not be being denied to people who are unable to afford legal
services, or whose cause is controversial or the subject of popular disapproval. By the same token,
representing a client does not constitute approval of the client's views or activities.
[7] The scope of services to be provided by a lawyer may be limited by agreement with the
client or by the terms under which the lawyer's services are made available to the client. When a
lawyer has been retained by an insurer to represent an insured, for example, the representation may
be limited to matters related to the insurance coverage. A limited representation may be appropriate
because the client has limited objectives for the representation. In addition, the terms upon which
representation is undertaken may exclude specific means that might otherwise be used to
accomplish the client’s objectives. Such limitations may exclude actions that the client thinks are
too costly or that the lawyer regards as repugnant or imprudent.
[8] Although this Rule affords the lawyer and client substantial latitude to limit the
representation, the limitation must be reasonable under the circumstances. If, for example, a client’s
objective is limited to securing general information about the law the client needs in order to handle
a common and typically uncomplicated legal problem, the lawyer and client may agree that the
lawyer’s services will be limited to a brief telephone consultation. Such a limitation, however, would
not be reasonable if the time allotted was not sufficient to yield advice upon which the client could
rely. Although an agreement for a limited representation does not exempt a lawyer from the duty to
provide competent representation, the limitation is a factor to be considered when determining the
legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.
See Rule 1.1.
[9]Other agreements concerning a lawyer’s representation of a client must accord with the
Rules of Professional Conduct and other law. See, e.g., Rules 1.1,1.8, and 5.6.
[10] Paragraph (d) prohibits a lawyer from counseling or assisting a client to engage in
conduct that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is criminal or fraudulent. This
prohibition, however, does not preclude the lawyer from giving an honest opinion about the actual
consequences that appear likely to result from a client's conduct. Nor does the fact that a client uses
advice in a course of action that is criminal or fraudulent of itself make a lawyer a party to the
questionable conduct and recommending the means by which a crime or fraud might be committed
with impunity.
[11] When the client's course of action has already begun and is continuing, the lawyer's
responsibility is especially delicate. The lawyer may be permitted but is not required by Rule 1.6 to
reveal the client's wrongdoing. In any case, however, the lawyer is required to avoid furthering the
purpose, for example, by suggesting how it might be concealed. A lawyer may not continue
assisting a client in conduct that the lawyer originally supposed was legally proper but then
discovers is criminal or fraudulent. The lawyer must, therefore, withdraw from the representation of
the client in the matter. See Rule 1.16(a).
[12] Where the client is a fiduciary, the lawyer may be charged with special obligations in
dealings with a beneficiary.
[13] Paragraph (d) applies whether or not the defrauded party is a party to the transaction.
Hence, a lawyer must not participate in a sham transaction; for example, a transaction to effectuate
criminal or fraudulent escape of tax liability. Paragraph (d) does not preclude undertaking a
criminal defense incident to a general retainer for legal services to a lawful enterprise. The last
clause of paragraph(d) recognizes that determining the validity or interpretation of a statute or
regulation may require a course of action involving disobedience of the statute or regulation or of
the interpretation placed upon it by governmental authorities.
[14] If a lawyer comes to know or reasonably should know that a client expects assistance
not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law, or if the lawyer intends to act
contrary to the client’s instructions, the lawyer must consult with the client regarding thelimitations
on the lawyer’s conduct. See Rule 1.4.
See Rule 1.0(i)
“Consultation” See Rule 1.0(c)
“Knows”See Rule 1.0(f)
“Reasonably Should Know”See Rule 1.0(k)
“Fraudulent”See Rule 1.0(e)
DILIGENCE
[1] A lawyer should pursue a matter on behalf of a client despite opposition, obstruction or
personal inconvenience to the lawyer, and may take whatever lawful and ethical measures are
required to vindicate a client's cause or endeavor. A lawyer should act with commitment and
dedication to the interests of the client and with zeal in advocacy upon the client's behalf. However, a
lawyer is not bound to press for every advantage that might be realized for a client. Unless
instructed by a client to the contrary, a lawyer has professional discretion in determining the means
by which a matter should be pursued, and the lawyer is not required to abide by unreasonable client
instructions. See Rule 1.2. A lawyer's work load should be controlled so that each matter can be
handled adequately.
[2] Perhaps no professional shortcoming is more widely resented than procrastination. A
client's interests often can be adversely affected by the passage of time or the change of conditions;
in extreme instances, as when a lawyer overlooks a statute of limitations, the client's legal position
may be destroyed. Even when the client's interests are not affected in substance, however,
unreasonable delay can cause a client needless anxiety and undermine confidence in the lawyer's
trustworthiness.
[3] Unless the relationship is terminated as provided in Rule 1.16, a lawyer should carry
through to conclusion all matters undertaken for a client. If a lawyer's employment is limited to a
specific matter, the relationship terminates when the matter has been resolved. If a lawyer has served
a client over a substantial period in a variety of matters, the client sometimes may assume that the
lawyer will continue to serve on a continuing basis unless the lawyer gives notice of withdrawal.
Doubt about whether a client-lawyer relationship still exists should be clarified by the lawyer,
preferably in writing, so that the client will not mistakenly suppose the lawyer is looking after the
client's affairs when the lawyer has ceased to do so. For example, if a lawyer has handled a judicial
or administrative proceeding that produced a result adverse to the client but has not been specifically
instructed concerning pursuit of an appeal, the lawyer should advise the client of the possibility of
appeal before relinquishing responsibility for the matter.
See Rule 1.0(i)
COMMUNICATION
reasonable requests for information within a reasonable time.
informed decisions regarding the representation.
[1] Reasonable communication between the lawyer and the client is necessary for the client
to effectively participate in the representation. When a decision about the representation must be
made by the client, the lawyer must consult with and secure the client’s consent prior to taking
action. Thus, a lawyer who receives from opposing counsel an offer of settlement in a civil
controversy or a proffered plea bargain in a criminal case should promptly inform the client of its
substance, unless prior discussions with the client have left it clear that the proposal would be
unacceptable. With respect to the decisions for which the client’s prior consent is not required by
Rule 1.2, the lawyer’s responsibility is to keep the client reasonably informed. In some situations --
depending on both the importance of the action under consideration and the feasibility of consulting
with the client -- this duty will require consultation prior to taking the action. In other
circumstances, such as during a trial when an immediate decision must be made, practical exigency
may also require a lawyer to act for a client without prior consultation. In such cases, and in other
situations in which the client has impliedly or expressly delegated authority to the lawyer to take
action without prior consultation, the lawyer must nonetheless act reasonably to keep the client
informed of actions the lawyer has taken on the client’s behalf.
[2] The client should have sufficient information to participate intelligently in decisions
concerning the objectives of the representation and the means by which they are to be pursued, to
the extent the client is willing and able to do so. For example, a lawyer negotiating on behalf of a
client should provide the client with facts relevant to the matter, inform the client of communications
from another party and take other reasonable steps that permit the client to make a decision
regarding a serious offer from another party.
[3] Ordinarily, the information to be provided is that appropriate for a client who is a
comprehending and responsible adult. However, fully informing the client according to this
standard may be impracticable, for example, where the client is a child or suffers from mental
disability. See Rule 1.14. When the client is an organization or group, it is often impossible or
inappropriate to inform every one of its members about its legal affairs; ordinarily, the lawyer
should address communications to the appropriate officials of the organization. See Rule 1.13.
Where many routine matters are involved, a system of limited or occasional reporting may be
arranged with the client. Practical exigency may also require a lawyer to act for a client without prior
consultation.
[4] In some circumstances, a lawyer may be justified in delaying transmission of
information when the client would be likely to react imprudently to an immediate communication.
Thus, a lawyer might withhold a psychiatric diagnosis of a client when the examining psychiatrist
indicates that disclosure would harm the client. A lawyer may not withhold information to serve the
lawyer's own interest or convenience. Rules or court orders governing litigation may provide that
information supplied to a lawyer may not be disclosed to the client. Rule 3.4(c) directs compliance
with such rules or orders.
See Rule 1.0(i)