伦理意见248
Whether Lawyer May 代表resent Multiple Plaintiffs Claiming Employment Discrimination in Selection of Other Person for Position They Sought
澳门赌场官网不一定不能代表同一职位的多名候选人，这些候选人声称对另一名候选人的选择受到非法歧视, 前提是, 在协商该代理的其他严重风险后, 客户同意对代理范围的任何必要限制以及未来可能需要单独代理的情况, 澳门赌场官网将能够热情地代表每一位客户.
适用的规则
- 规则1.2(代理范围)
- 规则1.3(勤奋与热情)
- 规则1.(利益冲突:一般规则)
调查
有两个人来找澳门赌场官网申请, 但我没有得到, 一份工作，并且认为这个选择是基于被禁止的歧视性做法. 询问他是否可以同时代表两个原告, Lawyer states that to establish liability he need only prove that each plaintiff was better qualified than the person selected;1 他没有谈到救济的问题.
讨论
主要标准是规则1.7，其中有关部分规定:
(a)澳门赌场官网不得就某一事项中所采取的立场与同一澳门赌场官网就该立场所代理的另一客户在同一事项中已采取或将采取的立场相反的立场代表客户.
(b)以下第(c)段允许的情况除外, 有下列情形之一的，澳门赌场官网不得代理委托人:
(1)该客户在该事项中所采取的立场与另一客户在同一事项中所采取或将采取的立场相反;
(2) such representation will be or is likely to be adversely affected by representation of another client;
(3) representation of another client will be or reasonably may be adversely affected by the representation of another client;
(4)澳门赌场官网代表委托人作出的专业判断将受到或合理可能受到澳门赌场官网对第三方的责任或利益或澳门赌场官网自身财务状况的不利影响, 业务, 财产, 或者个人兴趣.
规则1.7(c)允许根据规则1表示.7 (b)如果:
(1) each potentially affected client provides consent to such representation after full disclosure of the existence and nature of the possible conflict and the possible adverse 后果 of such representation; and
(2) the lawyer is able to comply with all other applicable rules with respect to such representation.
“充分披露”要求“向客户详细解释风险和不利因素”.” 关于詹姆斯, 452 A.2d 163, 167 (D.C. 应用程序. 1982), cert. 否认, 460 U.S. 1038 (1983). 对规则1的注释[12].7涉及同意所需的披露:
充分披露要求披露当事人及其在各自职位上的利益，以使每个潜在客户能够就是否继续进行预期的代理作出充分知情的决定. 如果澳门赌场官网对一个或另一个客户的义务 . . . 禁止向所有受影响的各方充分披露, 仅凭这一事实就排除了进行有关陈述的可能性. 充分披露还要求客户了解可能的额外费用, 带来的不便, 如果以后出现实际的立场冲突，澳门赌场官网被要求终止代理，可能会产生其他不利因素.
另外，规则1.2 (c)提供:
(c) A lawyer may limit the objectives of the representation if the client consents after consultation.2
正如上诉法院最近解释的那样，“规则1.7(a)规定绝对禁止双重或多重代理，当澳门赌场官网将代表在同一事件中处于不利地位的客户时.客户同意并不能解决这样的冲突.” Griva v. 戴维森, No. 92 - cv - 992 (D.C. Ct. 应用程序. 2月. 10, 1994)， 122华盛顿. D.L. 代表. 441, 宠物. 盐土. 等待.
但是，规则1.7(b)概述了并非绝对禁止双重代表的另一类案件. 对规则1的注释[4].7了, 声明根据(b)段, if a lawyer would not be required to take adverse positions for two clients in the “liability phase” of a case, 但可能在损害赔偿阶段, the lawyer could agree to represent both in the liability phase and then one or the other in the damages phase.3 然而, 评论[5]警告说，澳门赌场官网继续代表任何一方的能力可能会受到限制，因为澳门赌场官网了解到规则1所保护的机密或秘密.(六)未经涉及保密或者秘密的当事人同意的.
调查提出的问题与委员会在第2号意见中处理的问题类似. 131 .关于先前的纪律规则. 委员会的结论是，在针对联邦机构的歧视诉讼中代表原告群体的公司，不能在不相关的行政诉讼中代表该机构的雇员申诉者，以删除该雇员档案中的某些绩效评估, 其中一些是由一位主管准备的，他是另一个行动的班级成员. 裁定该陈述构成违反DR 5-105的冲突, 并且不能被放弃, 委员会的结论是，成功地代表员工将等于成功地攻击主管/班级成员的判断, 而这样的裁决可以用来否定监管者的救济. Among the Committee’s reasons were “the very real possibility that in representing the employee-grievant, 该公司可能会(确实如此), should) be reluctant to do what is necessary to succeed; that is, 攻击其中一个客户的判断和行为, 未命名的类成员.进一步的担忧是“一个非常现实的危险，即调查公司可能会在代表评估官员在集体诉讼中为她提供个人救济的过程中泄露雇员申诉者的机密。. . . . 尽管申诉人可以同意披露机密信息, 愤愤不平的人几乎没有动力这么做.”4
对规则1的注释[4].7 posits a clear bifurcation of proceedings into liability and damages phases which may or may not occur. 虽然这种划分在过去的就业歧视案件中很常见, 最近对《澳门赌场官网》的修正允许陪审团审判和补偿性损害赔偿，这创造了一种前景，即一方或另一方可能受益于并有权坚持对所有问题进行统一审判, 涵盖责任及救济.
The inquirer has not addressed the possibility that the Clients’ interests would be adverse as to relief. 例如, 被告可能会辩称, 因为只有一个空缺，原告中只有一个可以被选中, even if there were a violation only one plaintiff can be held entitled to the job or to back pay and damages. 分岔的有或没有分岔的, 此外, the relief issues are likely to arise at any stage of the case in the context of settlement discussions, e.g., 关于报酬或职位的邀请.
在可能对每一个原告都有利的情况下，澳门赌场官网不能代表两个原告，以表明他或她会被选中，而不是另一个原告. 此外, 很有可能, 当出现需要单独代表的问题时, 澳门赌场官网将获得关于受规则1保护的每个客户的信息.6. 因此，很难看出澳门赌场官网如何得出一个客户的代理不会“可能受到”另一个客户的代理的不利影响的结论, or that the lawyer’s professional judgment on behalf of one client might not “be adversely affected by the Lawyer’s responsibilities to . . . 第三方。” i.e., 另一个客户. It also seems quite possible that Lawyer will end up having to take “adverse positions” for the two clients in the same matter (e.g., 关于他们的相对资格). 这很难预料, 是否存在任何可能取消资格的条件，并已了解, 客户将提供知情同意，允许同一名澳门赌场官网代表他们的分歧, 救济方面的竞争利益. An alternative might be for Lawyer and the clients to limit the objectives of the representation to establishing liability, 规则1所允许的.2(c)，但这是否经常可行是有问题的.
满足第1条规定的协商或同意的要求.2(c)或1.7(c), Lawyer would have to explain the various ways in which the clients’ interests could come into conflict, the possible hampering of both of their respective claims if they were to agree not to take conflicting positions, the possible added cost and disruption if it were necessary for either or both to get new counsel later, 如果考虑或有费用，关于补偿的复杂性, 等. 此外，我们注意到 Griva,上, 上诉法院最近驳回了一个论点, 根据法律, 当发生实际冲突时，不能撤销对双重代理的同意.
它是, 当然, possible that Lawyer could represent both clients without having to take antagonistic positions: Lawyer’s evident premise of bifurcated proceedings might prove correct; the plaintiffs might agree not to attack each other in the liability phase; both plaintiffs might lose in the liability phase; if they win, 为了避免冲突，他们可能同意在有限的目标下共同代表, or on separate representation of one or both (assuming the complications as to fees could be resolved), 等. 因此，我们不准备说规则1.7排除该等陈述.
即使在澳门赌场官网全面披露后客户对代理表示有意义的同意, Lawyer would still have to “comply with all other applicable rules with respect to such representation” of each client. 规则1.7(c)(2). 如规则1的注释[15]所述.7,
Disclosure and consent to representation do not diminish a lawyer’s obligations to comply with the other 职业行为准则. 例如, 即使客户提供了知情且非强制的同意, a lawyer may not undertake or continue a representation if the lawyer is unable to comply with the obligations regarding diligence . . . [规则1]规定.3].
规则1.3(a) states: “A lawyer shall represent a client zealously and diligently within the bounds of the law.”5 这种热心代表的义务是不能妥协的，这是公认的, 即使得到了客户的同意. 事实上, this Committee has concluded several times that the representation of a party—even with consent—would be improper where “the lawyer himself . . . 结论[5]他热切地代表…的能力 . . . (按规则1的要求).3)会因“利益冲突”而妥协. 法律道德通讯. D。.C. 酒吧Op. No. 226 (1992).6 因此, 澳门赌场官网将决定是否, 客户同意的代理范围见第6条, 他对他们的义务将限制他热情而勤奋地代表他们每一个人的能力.
委员会怀疑客户是否, 如果被充分告知澳门赌场官网代理可能受到的限制, 是否同意这种共同代表. 委员会还关切的是，获得适当消息的委托人是否会同意限制代理的范围，使澳门赌场官网能够合理地断定他能够履行热心代理的义务. 然而, the Committee does not believe that the possibility of such representation should be wholly precluded. 但cf. 规则1.7评论16(“最好在陈述开始前避免可能导致冲突的陈述, and a lawyer should bear this fact in mind in considering whether disclosure should be made and consent obtained at the outset.”),因此, 澳门赌场官网可以继续了, 但只有在所有客户被充分告知可能的风险后，他们才会知情同意, 后果, 以及共同代理的费用, 包括每个客户在诉讼的后期阶段可能需要新澳门赌场官网的风险, 即使客户同意，法院也可能取消澳门赌场官网的资格,7 而且前提是他认为他可以为每个客户提供热心的代理.
我们注意到，在各种情况下都可能出现同样的问题. 虽然具体问题可能因管辖法律而异, 索赔的性质, 寻求救济, 知情同意的需要和热心代表的责任将永远存在. Whether consent to joint representation will be permitted will depend upon the particular circumstances.
调查没有. 93-1-2
1994年6月21日通过
1. 在此前提下，我们不处理澳门赌场官网是否正确的法律问题.
2. The Terminology section of the 规则 defines “consent” as denoting “uncoerced assent to a proposed course of action, 在就有关事项与澳门赌场官网协商后,，并将“咨询”定义为“合理充分的信息沟通，使客户能够理解所讨论事项的重要性。.”
3. 评论[4]部分指出:
(a)款的绝对禁止只适用于要求澳门赌场官网在同一事项上支持不利立场的情况. 正是由于这个原因，(a)段所指的逆境是与某一事项中“已采取或将采取的立场”有关，而不是与该事项或整个陈述有关的逆境. This approach is intended to reduce the costs of litigation in other representations where parties have common, 对其他问题的非不利(或偶然或可能不利)立场. If, 例如, a lawyer would not be required to take adverse positions in providing point representation of two clients in the liability phase of a case, 进行这种有限的代表是允许的. 然后在责任阶段完成后, 及在符合本条第(c)段的规定后, 澳门赌场官网可以在案件的损害赔偿阶段代表任何一方, 即使另一个, 就损害赔偿问题由单独的澳门赌场官网代理, 可能对案件的这一阶段持不利立场.
4. This opinion is not dispositive because of significant language differences between DR 5-105 and 规则1.7. D.C. 规则4 1.7与ABA模型规则1有很大不同.7, which was itself a substantial revision of DR 5-105 and 5-101 (concerning “appearance of impropriety”). 然而, 虽然修订的目的是促进更广泛的多重代表性, 这些变化主要是为了澄清, 消除歧义, 运用客观而非主观的标准, 而不必改变旧规则下案件的结果. 建议的教授规则. 行为 & D .建议的相关意见.C. 酒吧Bd. 理事会议(十一月). 19, 1986) at 66-69 (“Yellow Book”); see Griva v. 戴维森,上. 特别是规则1.第7条并没有明确贯彻DR 5-105的要求，即“明显”澳门赌场官网可以为双方当事人提供“充分的代理”. 但是，规则1.7(c)(2) points in the same direction by permitting representation only if the lawyer “is able to comply with all other applicable rules.“见黄皮书，id.
5. 规则1.3个更充分的状态:
(a)澳门赌场官网应在法律范围内热心和勤勉地代表委托人
(b)澳门赌场官网不得故意:
(1) fail to seek the lawful objectives of a client through reasonably available means permitted by law and the disciplinary rules, or
(2)在业务关系中对委托人造成偏见或损害.
6. 参见D.C. 酒吧Op. No. 210 (1990) (“The Committee has previously recognized that the obvious ability to provide adequate representation, 根据DR 7-101[规则1的前身.3] must be zealous, is an independent requirement which must be met even though consent is provided.”); D.C. 酒吧Op. No. 163 (1986) (same); D.C. 酒吧Op. No. 49(1978)(同).
7. 确保有充分的咨询和同意, 同意书宜以书面形式备存. Cf., e.g.,柯南道尔 & 布卢门撒尔, The Defendants’ Perspective: Ethical Considerations in 代表resenting and Counseling Multiple Parties in Employment Litigation, 10劳动法. 19,38 -39(1994)(相同同意).
