Ethics Considerations
for Lawyer/Directors
There
are many issues to consider when taking on the dual role of attorney
and director for a client. But with careful planning and precautions,
the dual role can effectively benefit a client.
|
by
Dean R.
Dietrich,
|
Marquette 1997,
of Ruder, Ware & Michler L.L.S.C., Wausau, is chair of the State Bar
Professional Ethics Committee. He acknowledges the assistance of third-year
law student Lance Trollop in preparing this article. |
I serve as a member of the board of directors for a corporation that also
is a client of my law firm. Is this allowed? What are the risks of losing
the attorney-client privilege with this client?
Answer
There is no outright ban on acting as both legal counsel and director
for a client. Case law also supports the concept of acting as both attorney
and director or officer.1 However,
the ethical issues to consider are similar to those for any representation,
such as maintaining confidentiality and avoiding conflicts of interest.
1998 ABA opinion 98-410 (the ABA Opinion) described some potential conflicts
that should be considered when taking on the dual role of attorney and
director.2 For example, there
may be a conflict if the attorney is asked to represent the client in
an undertaking that the attorney opposed as director. In this situation,
the attorney must determine whether the representation is "materially
limited" by his opposition to the action under Model Rule 1.7(b). If the
attorney is disqualified under that rule, the conflict is imputed to the
rest of the firm under Model Rule 1.10(a). A second conflict may occur
if the attorney is asked to advise the corporation whether certain board
actions were legal. If the attorney took part in those actions, the requirement
of providing independent advice under Model Rule 1.7(b) may be violated.
A third conflict may arise regarding corporate actions benefiting the
attorney or her firm. For example, the corporation may consider a merger
or new service that requires substantial legal work. This conflict is
more a question of the attorney's ability to render independent advice
as a director rather than as an attorney.
The ABA Opinion made some useful suggestions to help a lawyer/director
avoid ethical violations and other problems. For example, the lawyer should
make sure the management and board of directors understand that the legal
representation is only of the corporation and not of the individuals.
The potential risks of conflicts of interest must be explained as well.
Also, the lawyer should excuse himself as director when the relationship
of the corporation with the attorney or firm is under consideration, such
as issues of performance or payment. In addition, the lawyer's duties
must be performed diligently even when, as director, he disagreed with
the course of action (unless the representation would violate the Model
Rules).
Another concern is the attorney-client privilege. The fact that an attorney
is also a director for the client does not drastically change the traditional
application of the attorney-client privilege for a corporation. Essentially,
the privilege applies to a legal service, but not to any business statements
or documents. However, it is often hard to determine what is "legal" and
what is "business" advice. This is even more difficult when an attorney
is a director, since she often is providing regular business advice. Another
complication is that the party asserting the privilege has the burden
of proving the communication was of a legal nature.3
The legal aspects of the advice must be dominant over the nonlegal aspects
for the privilege to apply. "To date, no clear test has been articulated
to determine when an attorney is acting in his or her legal capacity."4
Courts typically use a case-by-case analysis.5
Not only may the dual role increase the likelihood that the communication
had a business component, it may cause some courts to require a stronger
showing of proof that it should be protected. For example, one court held
that when a lawyer also serves in a business capacity, the corporation
must clearly show the communication was in a legal capacity for the privilege
to be applied.6 Presented with
a situation in which a lawyer was a vice president of the client, another
court also required clear evidence that the information was given in a
legal capacity.7
The ABA Opinion also offered some suggestions for lawyer/director conduct
at board meetings. First, if consulted for legal advice, make it clear
that the meeting concerns legal issues and avoid providing business advice.
Second, have another lawyer from the firm attend meetings to provide any
legal advice that is requested (this may not be practical financially).
Also, when legal advice is given, anyone not essential to the legal advice
should be excused from the room and the minutes should identify when the
lawyer gave advice on a legal matter. In addition, minutes and notes regarding
legal advice should be kept in a separate file marked "attorney-client
privilege."
The following guidelines would help maintain the attorney-client privilege.
- Have a primary contact attorney at the law firm separate from the
lawyer/director to ease the burden of proving a communication was predominantly
legal.
- All legal responsibility should funnel through only one person in
the corporation to reduce the risk of accidental exposure.
- The corporation should use legal titles for legal personnel, although
a second nonlegal title, like vice president, should not disqualify
the privilege.
- Use stationery and letterhead demonstrating a legal capacity when
acting as an attorney.
- Confirm requests for legal advice with a letter stating it is a legal
assignment.
- Use legal introductory signals, such as "our legal opinion is" or
"under the law."
- Keep billings and files for legal work separate from those for business
work.
- Limit written legal advice only to legal advice and mark it with
"attorney-client privilege."
Clearly, there are many issues to consider when taking on the dual role
of attorney and director for a client. The main complication is the protection
of the attorney-client privilege. However, with careful planning and precautions,
the dual role can be effectively used to a client's benefit.
To
Read More About It ...
Professional Ethics Committee opinions may be found online at www.wisbar.org/ethop/.
In addition, Professional Ethics Committee opinions are available
in Wisconsin Ethics Opinions, published by State Bar of Wisconsin
CLE Books. Wisconsin Ethics Opinions includes the complete text
of all formal, informal, and memorandum opinions issued by the Professional
Ethics Committee since 1954, including opinions that have been withdrawn.
The book also includes the full text of the Rules of Professional
Conduct for Attorneys (SCR 20). For more information or to order
Wisconsin Ethics Opinions, call (800) 728-7788 or visit WisBar at
www.wisbar.org/cle/books/.
|
Endnotes
1 See Niagra Fire Ins. Co. v. Pepicelli, Pepicelli,
Watts & Youngs P.C., 821 F.2d 216, 221-22 (3d Cir. 1987).
2 See ABA Comm. on Ethics and Professional Responsibility,
Formal Op. 98-410 (1998).
3 See Cuno Inc. v. Pall Corp., 121 F.R.D.
198, 200 (E.D.N.Y. 1988); In re Sealed Case, 737 F.2d 94, 99 (D.C.
Cir. 1984).
4 Scott R. Flucke, The Attorney-Client Privilege
in the Corporate Setting: Counsel's Dual Role as Attorney and Executive,
62 UMKC L. Rev. 549, 560 (1994).
5 See id. at 558; In re Southern Indus.
Banking Corp., 35 B.R. 643, 648 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1983).
6 See Teltron Inc. v. Alexander, 132 F.R.D.
394, 396 (E.D. Pa. 1990).
7 See In re Sealed Case, 737 F.2d at 99.
|