2021 MPRE Course 6 Conflicts of Interest

View the updated video here: • MPRE COURSE PART 6: Co...
Please sign up for our FREE MPRE course, get a FREE outline, and access to FREE questions here: www.jdadvising...

[@zima627]

she's a great presenter

[@aidenalamo6262]

What if the scenario represents both the business and tenant in a landlord dispute with another tenant? Would it follow the scenario similar to the airline lawsuit scenario?

[@JDAdvising]

Hello Aiden! Can you clarify your hypo a bit? Are you trying to build off the former client conflict example with the shopping center and the tenant? Or is this a brand new scenario where the lawyer has not been involved with any of the parties before, and now a business (is the buisness the landlord?) and tenant want to team up against another tenant?

[@aidenalamo6262]

@@JDAdvising Well its an older dispute but what you said in your reply applies. It mainly involves a Joint Tenancy with Rights of Survivorship and the attorney is representing the opposing party is someone whom knows all the parties from doing different work with each of them. Could you further explain Joint Tenancy with Rights of Survivorship and can women be banned from having them if they are not referenced well by a great past. Not a criminal record.

[@aidenalamo6262]

Let me clarify a bit more. I am concerned with Rule 1.7(a) on Comments 18 and 19 when it comes to waiving conflicts of interest as a easy way go gang up on the Joint Tenancy with Rights of Survivorship issue.

[@JDAdvising]

Joint tenancy with rights of survivorship is a type of co-tenancy where if one joint tenant dies, that share of the property automatically passes to the remaining joint tenants. It is a bit stronger of a tenancy than a tenancy in common. As long as the jurisdiction permits joint tenancies, there shouldn't be any reason that certain people would be prohibited from forming one. If the attorney representing one party has worked with the other parties in the past, there certainly could be a former client conflict problem. It would depend on the nature of the work that the attorney had done with the former clients. The relevant inquiries would be whether the matters are the same/substantially related and then whether the interests of the new client are materially adverse to the old client? Would the attorney be likely to have information about the old client from the previous matter that could be relevant to the new matter, such that now the attorney could harm the old client? The fact pattern would likely provide enough facts to explore those inquiries.

[@aidenalamo6262]

@@JDAdvising Thank you for your answer. I'll add more information about the case in short order.