ISBA Ethics Opinions by IRPC Rule 1.6

An Illinois attorney would violate the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct by accepting clients from a for-profit, third-party client referral service that (1) charges clients a fixed fee for petty criminal and traffic offense cases, (2) pays a lawyer in the service’s network a portion of the fixed fee, and (3) offers a money-back guarantee to the client if the client does not “win” the case. Even if the referral service did not contain these problematic features, an Illinois attorney still would violate the Rules of Professional Conduct if the referral service is one that (a) fails to disclose the use of non-attorney actors in advertising directed to potential clients, or (b) requires the lawyers to communicate with clients on an online platform monitored by the referral service, with no guarantee of confidentiality and no apparent disclosure to and informed consent of the client. Further, using referral services such as those described in this opinion also would raise other problems, including the potential that the lawyer would be unable to comply with their obligations under the Rules of Professional Conduct with respect to the charging of fees, including the obligation to ensure the fee charged is a reasonable one.

A law firm seeking to represent the employees of an adverse corporate entity in matters unrelated to the current dispute may do so, but only if the firm determines it can comply with Rule 1.7 and the appropriate parties provide informed consent.

Rule 1.13 of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct governs when and whether an in-house lawyer is required to report possibly fraudulent conduct of the entity’s employees, officers, or other individuals to higher authorities within the organization and to others outside the organization. Even if such reporting is not required, an in-house lawyer may be permitted to disclose such information within the organization, subject to the lawyer’s obligations to maintain client confidences under IRPC 1.6 and 1.9.

When a lawyer-mediator learns that a lawyer representing a party in a mediation has violated Rule 8.4(c), the lawyer-mediator has an obligation to report that lawyer’s misconduct. Provisions in the Uniform Mediation Act or the Not-For-Profit Mediation Center Act generally do not prevent such disclosure.

A lawyer may represent a client in a matter unrelated to a prior divorce proceeding in which the lawyer represented former client who now may testify against his current client. However, the lawyer may not cross-examine the former client unless it can be done both without using information relating to the prior representation to the disadvantage of the former client and without materially limiting his ability to effectively cross-examine the former client to the detriment of the current litigation client.

A lawyer who, without notice of the inadvertent transmission, receives and reviews an opposing party’s confidential materials through the error or inadvertence of opposing counsel, may use information in such materials. A lawyer who knows of an inadvertent transmission before confidential materials of an opposing party have been opened and reviewed should return such materials without examination. A lawyer has a duty to advise a client that confidential information was inadvertently transmitted to and read by opposing counsel.

Lawyer may represent a beneficiary of a trust in an action against the trustee even though lawyer had previously represented trust, beneficiary and trustee in condemnation suit involving trust property.

Lawyers may use electronic mail services, including the Internet, without encryption to communicate with clients unless unusual circumstances require enhanced security measures. The creation and use by a lawyer of an Internet “web site” containing information about the lawyer and the lawyer’s services that may be accessed by Internet users, including prospective clients, is not “communication directed to a specific recipient” within the meaning of the rules, and therefore only the general rules governing communications concerning a lawyer’s services and advertising should apply to a lawyer “web site” on the Internet. If a lawyer uses the Internet or other electronic mail service to direct messages to specific recipients, then the rules regarding solicitation would apply.

Upon termination of representation, a lawyer is required to return all papers and property received from the client, but may retain copies at the lawyer's expense. If the client requests copies of other parts of the lawyer's file, the lawyer should make copies of those materials in the lawyer's file to which the client is entitled to access available at the client's expense.

Where lawyer's knowledge of client's past violations of tax laws is either privileged or "secret" under Rule 1.6, the lawyer may not properly voluntarily disclose such violations to tax authorities or other persons without the consent of the client.

1. Use of any information relating to representation cannot be used by attorney to disadvantage of former client.
2. Absent consent, confidences and secrets of client gained in the course of professional relationships cannot be disclosed.
3. Use of client confidences and secrets as well as any information relating to the representation of a client, may be used or revealed by attorney to the extent necessary to defend accusation of wrongful conduct.
4. Discharged attorney entitled to quantum meruit compensation.

An attorney is not required to report misconduct of another attorney learned through a privileged attorney/client communication.

An attorney is obligated to report only certain forms of misconduct by another attorney, and only if he has "knowledge" of such misconduct as defined in the Rules of Professional Conduct.

An attorney is prohibited from representing a client in a negotiation of a lease against a former client when the representation is of the same or substantially related matter unless the former client consents after disclosure.

Improper for Public Defender's Office to disclose secret of one client to another client represented by different Assistant Public Defenders in unrelated cases.

1. There is no duty to report knowledge of professional misconduct protected as a confidence by the lawyer-client privilege.
2. The duty to report knowledge of professional misconduct of another lawyer should not apply to a lawyer retained to represent the lawyer whose professional conduct is in question.
3. There is a duty to report professional misconduct which is otherwise subject to mandatory reporting even if the ARDC has learned of the same misconduct from another source.

1. Lawyer is prohibited from representing husband in divorce action where lawyer had previously represented husband and wife in other joint matters;
2. Prohibition extends to lawyer's partner and firm.

A defense attorney whose client has disappeared may reveal such confidences or secrets upon requesting a continuance at a status call if required by court order or law to do so, but such attorney may not give a false reason for requesting a continuance.

1. It is professionally proper for a lawyer to represent two competing institutions where matters related thereto are substantially unrelated.
2. It is professionally proper for a lawyer to represent two competing lending institutions, one of whom he also serves as a member of the Board of Directors, as long as he secures consent to such representation from both institutions.

Duties owed by an attorney to his client are not transferred for the benefit of another to whom the client transfers its interest in the subject matter of the representation.

Practice of law and accounting in same office now permissible due to repeal of Code section that required physical separation of dual practices.