In what situation is dual representation permissible for a lawyer?

Dual representation is permissible when a lawyer believes they can effectively represent both clients and obtains informed consent from each. This standard is rooted in the ethical obligations that lawyers have to represent their clients competently and diligently while avoiding any conflicts of interest.

For dual representation to be appropriate, the lawyer must assess whether there are any actual or potential conflicts between the interests of the clients. If the lawyer determines that they can provide adequate representation to both without compromise, and both clients are fully informed and consenting to this arrangement, then dual representation is allowed.

This understanding aligns with the rules of professional conduct that emphasize the need for transparency, communication, and the clients’ understanding of the implications of such representation. It ensures that both clients’ rights and interests are safeguarded.

The other options do not fully capture the requirements for permissible dual representation. For instance, while government entities can have representations, it doesn’t automatically make dual representation ethical or valid. Simply having no conflicts of interest might not encompass all the ethical complexities involved. Additionally, representing clients in unrelated matters doesn’t necessarily constitute dual representation in the sense of the lawyer managing conflicting interests, which is a critical aspect of the inquiry.