Defeating pneumonia Note4students Mains Paper 2: From UPSC perspective, the following things are important: Not Much Mains level:
A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client consents after consultation.
We discuss obligations with respect to current clients at the section entitled, "Current Client and Direct Adversity. For purposes of this section, the key provision regarding current clients is at Model Rule 1.
A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client will be directly adverse to another client, unless. Thus, it makes a difference, for conflicts purposes, whether the client is "current" or "former.
As to former clients, the lawyer may be directly adverse unless the new matter is "substantially related" to what the lawyer did for the former client.
This section is built around several issues: Included is a discussion of the "accommodation client" concept. Finally, the section deals with an important subset of the substantial relationship issue - what Professor Wolfram refers to as the "playbook view.
Wolfram, Former-Client Conflicts, 10 Geo. Legal Ethics The "playbook view" refers to situations where a lawyer learns from a current client how the client approaches - or specific employees of the client approach - legal matters, thereby giving the lawyer a supposed advantage when opposing that person or entity as a former client.
More about Professor Wolfram's article and the "playbook view" later. Another very helpful source on these issues is Joan C. Rogers, Conflicts of Interest: Conduct, now pages It is an excellent page article on former clients.
It is the best writing on these subjects since Professor Wolfram's article, cited above.
Anyone with a former client issue should consult the Wolfram and Rogers articles. This site will continue to add cases on these subjects. Here is another one: Rogers, Former Client, 30 Law. Conduct November 19, This is a brave, and nuanced, attempt to make sense of the disparate approaches courts are taking in applying the substantial relationship test under Model Rule 1.
Extremely valuable and highly recommended. More cases deal with former client issues than just about any other issue relating to conflicts of interest. The cases also tend to be more fact-specific than those in other areas - particularly as to what is "substantially related.
It is the philosophy of this site to be as comprehensive as possible in including cases and opinions. However, given the large number of cases on these subjects and their fact-specific nature, we will cite leading examples without trying to set a record for number of cases and opinions cited.
When confronted with a conflict of interest argument, a lawyer would love to be able to fish out of her file a letter to the client that says the following: This matter has concluded.
We plan to do no further work for you, and you are no longer our client.Legal ethics site for lawyers with principal focus on conflicts of interest. The cigarette is the deadliest artifact in the history of human civilization.
It is also one of the most beguiling, thanks to more than a century of manipulation at the hands of tobacco industry chemists. Texas Medicine. Suicide is a growing health problem. With the U.S. and Texas facing a long-standing shortage of psychiatrists, there's real opportunity for primary care physicians to reach vulnerable patients.
The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank founded in and based in Arlington Heights, Illinois, in the northwest suburbs of ph-vs.com Institute conducts work on issues including education reform, government spending, taxation, healthcare, education, tobacco policy, global warming, hydraulic fracturing, information technology, and free.
The Minister of State for Health and Family Welfare has released an Analytical Report of the National Health Profile prepared by the Central Bureau of Health Intelligence (CBHI). Conner B I smoked underage for years and bought packs from the very same stores that the government's "protect".
Big name tobacco companies never tried not to sell to underage kids. If vaping was around when I was underage smoking, I would have rather chose the safer alternative.