FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W76806684> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W76806684 startingPage "741" @default.
• W76806684 abstract "Formal Opinion 95-390 of ABA's Ethics Committee: Corporate Clients, Conflicts of Interest, and Keeping Lid on Pandora's Box I. INTRODUCTION Consider these two seemingly dissimilar hypothetical scenarios. Scenario One: Your law firm represents Corporation from time to time in prosecution and protection of trademarks for Clip-Rite brand nail clippers. Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of Humongous Corporation, a multinational conglomeration of enterprises ranging from bituminous coal mining to baby food production. One day, your largest client, Big Cat Pistons, asks you to bring a comparatively insignificant lawsuit against another wholly owned subsidiary of Humongous Corp., Thunder Diesel Engines. Humongous Corp. has recently acquired Thunder Diesel without your knowledge. Although you have done no work for either Thunder Diesel or directly for Humongous Corp., you wonder whether your representation of presents a conflict of interest that prohibits you from undertaking a representation adverse to Clip-Rite's sibling company Thunder Diesel.l Your firm's ethics guru consults Formal Opinion 95-390 of ABA's Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility2 and determines, quite reasonably, that such a remotely adverse representation is ethically permissible.3 Scenario Two: Your law firm represents a small welding company called Mom-N-Pop, Incorporated, in most of its legal matters. Several years earlier, Mom-N-Pop had purchased an acetylene supply company called Ace Acetylene. Your firm did not participate in acquisition and has performed no legal work for subsidiary, which kept its existing officers and board of directors following buyout. Since acquisition, Ace has flourished, generating almost all profits in Mom-N-Pop's (very limited) empire. But once again, Big Cat Pistons has entered picture. This time, Big Cat wants you to institute a multimillion dollar breach of contract suit against Ace. Although you know that an adverse judgment in suit could cripple Ace and do serious economic harm to Mom-N-Pop, your ethics guru again tells you that representation is ethically permissible under Formal Opinion 95-390.4 In each of these scenarios, adherence to Formal Opinion 95-390 permits lawyer to disregard economic impact of representation on original client, even when that impact is potentially devastating, as it is in second scenario. As this Note explains, this disregard of economic consequences is key point of disagreement over conflicts of interest in family context, both in courts and in Ethics Committee. Formal Opinion 95-390 addresses question that has led to this disagreement: When, if ever, may a lawyer or law firmS ethically represent one client against corporate affiliate of another client in an unrelated matter without obtaining consent of either client?6 After grappling with this question for more than two years, a six-member majority of Ethics Committee voted to permit such representations under certain circumstances, in spite of negative economic consequences for client.7 Three dissenters, speaking in two separate dissents, expressed a fundamental philosophical disagreement with majority's position.8 The dissenters predicted that dire consequences would flow from majority's opinion, one warning that the opinion opens a Pandora's Box of unintended consequences which most assuredly will return to vex us in future.9 This Note analyzes Formal Opinion 95-390 and argues that both majority and dissenters make valid points. The majority's reasoning rests on correct philosophical foundation for determining whether conflicts of interest exist in family context. However, dissenters are correct in predicting that undesirable adverse consequences will result from opinion's application. …" @default.
• W76806684 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W76806684 creator A5039606177 @default.
• W76806684 date "1997-01-01" @default.
• W76806684 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W76806684 title "Formal Opinion 95-390 of the ABA's Ethics Committee: Corporate Clients, Conflicts of Interest, and Keeping the Lid on Pandora's Box" @default.
• W76806684 hasPublicationYear "1997" @default.
• W76806684 type Work @default.
• W76806684 sameAs 76806684 @default.
• W76806684 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W76806684 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W76806684 hasAuthorship W76806684A5039606177 @default.
• W76806684 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W76806684 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W76806684 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W76806684 hasConcept C187736073 @default.
• W76806684 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W76806684 hasConcept C2778348171 @default.
• W76806684 hasConceptScore W76806684C144133560 @default.
• W76806684 hasConceptScore W76806684C162324750 @default.
• W76806684 hasConceptScore W76806684C17744445 @default.
• W76806684 hasConceptScore W76806684C187736073 @default.
• W76806684 hasConceptScore W76806684C199539241 @default.
• W76806684 hasConceptScore W76806684C2778348171 @default.
• W76806684 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W76806684 hasLocation W768066841 @default.
• W76806684 hasOpenAccess W76806684 @default.
• W76806684 hasPrimaryLocation W768066841 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W1204241306 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W129040843 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W1494014549 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W1518360619 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W153666843 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W1600360774 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W1603872892 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W194913663 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W2180338510 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W221466855 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W2346035384 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W264410726 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W306602487 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W328921598 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W37072330 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W614914634 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W143874292 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W1965410789 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W2605921853 @default.
• W76806684 hasRelatedWork W3122840558 @default.
• W76806684 hasVolume "91" @default.
• W76806684 isParatext "false" @default.
• W76806684 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W76806684 magId "76806684" @default.
• W76806684 workType "article" @default.