Elements of an Effective Ethics Screen


State rules of professional conduct and related authorities contain considerable guidance on when an ethics screen may prevent a conflict of interest from imputing or spreading from one person at a firm to taint everyone else at the firm with a conflict. Such authority on how to set an effective screen, however, is often surprisingly sparse. Moreover, state ethics rules are often inconsistent on what elements are required for a screen to be effective.

This article seeks to remedy this shortcoming by providing a clear account of what elements should be included for an ethics screen to be effective. It begins with an examination of what elements specific ethics rules require. This article then draws upon precedent to further establish and explain the components of an effective screen, and offers guidance on what components a law firm should consider employing to avoid imputation of an otherwise disqualifying conflict of interest.

Ethics Screens in the ABA Model Rules

The American Bar Association (‘‘ABA’’) Model Rules of Professional Conduct identify five circumstances when, without client consent, a law firm may use an ethics screen to prevent imputation of an otherwise disqualifying conflict of interest from one or more lawyers or nonlawyers who have the conflict to the rest of the law firm.

The five circumstances specified in four ABA Model Rules—Model Rules 1.10, 1.11, 1.12 and 1.18—are:

when the conflict arises from prior work performed by a nonlawyer, Rule 1.10 cmt. [4];

when the conflict arises from prior work by a lawyer who was a government lawyer when the work was performed, Rule 1.11;

when the conflict arises from prior involvement as a judge or other neutral, Rule 1.12;

when the conflict arises from communications with a prospective but declined client, Rule 1.18; and

when the conflict arises from work that a lawyer did when at a prior firm, Rule 1.10.

No state has adopted all five of these Model Rules verbatim. In fact, no state’s version of Model Rule 1.10 mirrors the Model Rule on private firm lateral attorney ethics screens. Yet a closer look at these four Model Rules, as well as the definition of ethics screens in Model Rule 1.10, reveals two points.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Armstrong Teasdale LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Armstrong Teasdale LLP on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.