道德意见383
Disclosure of Client Confidences or Secrets in Compliance With the Outside Counsel Guidelines of Another Client; Advance Agreement to Withdraw from Representation in the Event of a “Midstream” Conflict
没有知情同意, a lawyer generally may not disclose to a client or prospective client information about another client or prospective client that is protected by 规则1.6或规则1.18. 这些信息包括规则1中定义的所有机密和秘密.6, which typically include the identity of another client or prospective client 和 the nature of the other client or prospective client’s matter. 甚至要求或同意承诺披露这些信息, 无论是根据外部法律顾问指南还是其他, 可能构成对他人违反的禁止诱因, 或者企图违反, 《职业行为准则.
规则1.7(d), 而不是一个客户与其外部靠谱的滚球平台之间的事先协议, 规定如果出现“中游”冲突，靠谱的滚球平台是否必须退出代理.
也, a lawyer may not permit a client to have access to the lawyer’s records if such access might disclose confidences or secrets of other clients.
适用的规则
- 1.6(信息保密)
- 1.7(d)(一般而言的利益冲突)
- 1.16(拒绝或终止代表)
- 1.18(b)(对潜在客户的责任)
- 8.4 (a)(行为)
调查
近年来, 关于外部法律顾问与其客户或潜在客户之间的关系，出现了许多问题. 这些问题经常出现在聘书的背景下, 外部靠谱的滚球平台指引, 或类似的事业(集体), “ocg”)由大型机构客户生成. 此类监察小组有时需要外部法律顾问, 作为合同的一部分, 从事:从事或不从事特定的行为或行为.
ocg可能会对受《靠谱的滚球平台》保护的信息提出问题.C. 《靠谱的滚球平台》(“D.C. 规则”或“规则”). 举个例子, 靠谱的滚球平台或靠谱的滚球平台事务所可能会被要求同意作为合同事项向客户提供咨询, 或征得客户同意, 在靠谱的滚球平台或靠谱的滚球平台事务所同意在不涉及客户的无关事项中代表客户的竞争对手之前. 有时这样的要求延伸到 问题 当事人可能会感兴趣, even if the prospective client is not a competitor of the requesting client 和 the requesting client is not involved in the prospective matter. These types of 问题s may arise even before a lawyer 和 a prospective client reach the point of establishing an attorney-client relationship—for example, 当一个潜在的客户正在面试可能保留的靠谱的滚球平台. 重要的是，这些陈述不会构成《靠谱的滚球平台》下的利益冲突.C. 规则.1
靠谱的滚球平台是否可以要求或同意这种承诺，不在本意见的范围之内. 法律伦理委员会发表这一意见主要是为了提醒靠谱的滚球平台，在没有知情同意的情况下,2 解析:选D.C. 规则禁止在此类请求或承诺中披露客户受保护的信息, 和 (2) agreeing to make such a disclosure or intentionally requesting such information may constitute a violation of the 规则 even if no disclosure ultimately is made.
委员会还审查了在一些ocg中发现的两项额外要求是否适当, namely that (1) the outside lawyer must withdraw from representing another current client if a so-called midstream conflict arises 和 (2) the client be permitted to audit the lawyer’s records.
讨论
D.C. 规则在允许客户和靠谱的滚球平台自由地根据他们认为合适的方式签订合同之间取得了平衡, 一方面，一方面, 保护法律实践的基本要素, 另一方面. 这些基本要素包括特定客户信息的保密性.
除了一些例外，规则1.第6条禁止靠谱的滚球平台泄露客户的“机密”或“秘密”3 以及禁止利用这些信息“为靠谱的滚球平台或第三方谋取利益”.”4 规则1.18(b)对潜在客户的机密和秘密提供类似的保护. "机密"是受靠谱的滚球平台-当事人保密特权保护的信息.5 “Secrets” are defined broadly as “other information gained in the 职业al relationship that the client has requested be held inviolate, 否则泄露出来会很尴尬, 或者可能是有害的, 致客户端.”6
例如，既不是机密也不是秘密的信息, “无害或无懈可击”的信息7 以及“众所周知”的前客户信息8 -不受规则1的保护.6和1.18. 请注意, 然而, “靠谱的滚球平台必须错误地保护存在任何疑问的信息”，无论这些信息是否属于机密或秘密.9
与代表其他客户有关的信息
客户的身份受规则1的保护.至少在披露可能对客户不利的情况下.10 对待潜在客户也是如此.11 该陈述或预期陈述的性质也是受保护的秘密12 在某些情况下也可能是一种信心.
未获得受影响客户或潜在客户的知情同意, 披露该人的身份或靠谱的滚球平台代表该人的问题将违反规则1.6、规则1.18, or both where the client or prospective client has requested that the information be held inviolate or where its disclosure would be embarrassing or likely detrimental 致客户端 or prospective client.
因此，为客户聘请外部靠谱的滚球平台 A 平时可能不会透露给 A 该靠谱的滚球平台的客户或潜在客户的身份 B，或…的性质 B除非规则1的例外允许，否则不属于法律问题.6. 通常情况下，唯一可能适用的例外是“经[B].“这种同意可能不会在哪里出现 A 和 B 是竞争者还是在哪里? B 不希望其聘请的靠谱的滚球平台被披露. 此外, waivers of confidentiality “may not be implied from waivers of conflicts of interest” 和 are subject to “particular scrutiny” if challenged.13
同意披露此类信息的靠谱的滚球平台有违反D.C. 规则8.(a)即使她实际上从未披露受保护的信息, 因为该规则不仅禁止违反规则，而且禁止企图违反规则.14
此外, an in-house lawyer who secures outside counsel’s agreement to an OCG that requires outside counsel to violate the 规则 may herself become subject to discipline: “It is 职业al misconduct for a lawyer to . . . 故意 . . . 诱使他人[违反规则].”15 事实上, 甚至寻求达成这样一项协议也可能构成违反《靠谱的滚球平台》或诱使他人这样做的被禁止的企图.16 进一步, 内部靠谱的滚球平台不能通过让非靠谱的滚球平台请求这样的协议来避免本意见中讨论的限制, 因为“通过他人的行为”违反规则也是被禁止的.17
也就是说, an in-house lawyer does not induce or attempt a violation if her request for information about other clients is conditioned upon such disclosure being consistent with the 规则’ restrictions regarding client confidences 和 secrets. (如果存在利益冲突, the outside lawyer would have to decline the proposed representation if she would have to disclose another client’s confidences or secrets in order to seek informed consent.18 此外, a lawyer making an inquiry of another lawyer does not induce or attempt a violation if she reasonably believes that her inquiry will not elicit information protected by 规则1.6或规则1.18.
“中游”利益冲突
Another type of OCG that has come to the Committee’s attention requires the lawyer to withdraw from representing another current client if a so-called midstream conflict arises. A midstream conflict is one that arises after a representation has commenced 和 that was “not reasonably foreseeable at the outset of the representation.”19 在这种情况下, “a lawyer need not withdraw from any representation unless the conflict [would adversely affect one of the representations in question].”20 没有这种不利影响的, a lawyer may not withdraw under such circumstances if withdrawal would have a “material adverse effect on the interests of the client” from whose representation the lawyer proposes to withdraw unless one of the specialized circumstances set out in 规则1.见第16(b)(1)至(5)条.21 因此，作出这种退出的事先协议可能违反规则1.7(d).
客户有权查阅靠谱的滚球平台事务所的记录
OCGs requiring that the client be permitted to audit a lawyer’s records also may implicate the rules protecting client confidences 和 secrets. 这不仅取决于OCG的广度，还取决于靠谱的滚球平台记录保存系统的性质.
One provision of which the Committee is aware states: “[CLIENT] shall have full access to all electronic 和 paper records the firm maintains 和 the right to examine any such materials during this period upon reasonable notice.”
客户端有权使用其整个文件, 在某些情况下，靠谱的滚球平台工作产品没有全额支付费用，这是一个狭窄的例外.22 这是天壤之别, 然而, 从"完全接触"到靠谱的滚球平台的记录, 如果这样的访问可能会泄露其他客户的机密或秘密，则不允许这样做.g., 如果靠谱的滚球平台的电子纪录储存在架构相对开放的资讯系统内).
结论
没有知情同意, a lawyer generally may not disclose to a client or prospective client information about another client or prospective client that is a protected secret or confidence under 规则1.6或规则1.18. 此类信息通常包括(1)其他客户或潜在客户的身份, (2)对方事物的性质. 甚至要求或同意承诺披露这些信息, 无论是根据外部法律顾问指南还是其他方式, 可能构成禁止的企图或诱使他人违反规则.
规则1.7(d)和1.16, 而不是一个客户与其外部靠谱的滚球平台之间的事先协议, 如果出现“中游”冲突，规定靠谱的滚球平台是否必须或可以退出代理另一客户.
最后, a lawyer may not permit a client to have access to the lawyer’s records if such access might disclose confidences or secrets of other clients.
发布日期:2022年4月
1. 看到 D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.7(一般冲突规则). 虽然现在的D.C. 规则允许靠谱的滚球平台和她的客户扩展——可以说没有限制——规则1.对于利益冲突的定义，D.C. 酒吧建议D.C. Court of Appeals eliminate this open-ended provision 和 limit the definition of conflicts of interest to those set out expressly in the 规则. D.C. 好吧，教授的规则. 进行检讨通讯.，向理事会报告，建议修改d.C. 与客户产生的委约书和外部法律顾问指南有关的职业行为规则(2006年1月). 2022) at 4-12, 23-26
(http://gnt.1e1v.com/getmedia/a2fed463-f33e-4155-82e4-3622e1e37afb/Report-of-OCGs-2022-Final-Transmittal-to-The DCCA)
2. 看到 D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.6(e)(1). “‘Informed consent’ denotes the agreement by a person to a proposed course of conduct after the lawyer has communicated adequate information 和 explanation about the material risks of 和 reasonably available alternatives to the proposed course of conduct.” D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.0(e).
3. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.6(a)(1).
4. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.6(a)(3).
5. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.6(b).
6. Id.
7. D.C. 靠谱的滚球平台公会法律操守课. 312 (2002).
8. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.6, cmt. [10]. The ABA’s St和ing Committee on Ethics 和 教授essional Responsibility has explained that “generally known” means “widely recognized by members of the public in the relevant geographic area or . . . 在前客户所在行业得到广泛认可, 职业, 或者贸易”，而不仅仅是, 说, 在公开法庭上被提及, 公开记录, 或者是公共图书馆提供的文件. 美国靠谱的滚球平台协会正式道德课程. 479 (2017); see N.Y. 州靠谱的滚球平台事务所. 1088¶8(2016)(讨论已知信息的示例). 信息出现在某个地方的公开文件中，这一事实并不能理所当然地将此类数据从“机密”类别中移除. D.C. 靠谱的滚球平台公会法律操守课. 246 (1994).
9. D.C. 靠谱的滚球平台公会法律操守课. 312 (2002).
10. In re Hager, 812 A.2d 904, 920 (D.C. 2002); accord ABA Formal Op. 480 at 2 (2018); ELLEN J. 班尼特 & 海伦W. 《靠谱的足球滚球平台》112-13(第9版). 2019)(“注释示范规则”).
11. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.18(b); accord D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.6, cmt. [9]; ANNOTATED MODEL RULES 312-13.
12. 看到 N.Y. 州靠谱的滚球平台事务所.720(1999)(解释N.Y. 规则1的版本.6).
13. D.C. 靠谱的滚球平台公会法律操守课. 309 n. 10 (2001).
14. 参见In re Fink, 22 A.3d 461(续. 2011)(对收取不合理费用的靠谱的滚球平台的处罚, 即使靠谱的滚球平台没有试图收集它).
15. D.C. R. 教授. 进行8.4(a); 参见In re Asher, 772 A.2d 1161 (D.C. 2001)(诱使另一名靠谱的滚球平台向法庭撒谎); 关于艾萨克森, 860 N.W.2d 490(威斯康星. 2015)(指示其他靠谱的滚球平台提交包含虚假和冒犯性陈述的法庭文件).
16. 看到芬克, 22 A.3d 461.
17. D.C. R. 教授. 进行8.4(a)
18. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.7, cmt. [27]; D.C. 靠谱的滚球平台公会法律操守课. 312 n. 9 (2002).
19. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.7(d).
20. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.7(d).
21. 看到 D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.16(b).
22. D.C. R. 教授. 进行1.8(i), 1.16(d); D.C. 法律伦理课. 333 (2005); D.C. 法律伦理课. 250 (1994); D.C. 法律伦理课. 230 (1992).
