November 7, 2007
Concurrent And Imputed Conflicts Draw Censure
Two law partners who had represented both the University of Idaho Foundation ("UIF") and an entity that agreed to act as project manager in a property development pursuant to an agreement with UIF were censured by stipulated resolution for violating Idaho Rules 1.7 (concurrent conflict of interest) and 1.10 (imputed disqualification). The lawyers had failed to secure properly informed consent to the conflicted representations: one partner was sanctioned for "failing to adequately and timely consult with and explain...the implications and risks of his firm's representation of another client in a common transaction and to receive [UIF's] informed consent of such representation." There is similar language with respect to the conduct of the other partner.
A link to the summaries of the findings comes from the web page of the Idaho State Bar. The sanction was imposed by the Idaho Professional Conduct Board. (Mike Frisch)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Concurrent And Imputed Conflicts Draw Censure: