OHBPC June 10, 2022

When does a personal relationship with opposing counsel, such as a spouse, partner, or friend, require disclosure and client consent?

Short answer: Spouses and those in marriage-equivalent intimate relationships cannot oppose each other without informed written consent, and a close friendship with opposing counsel requires disclosure and consent; acquaintances and limited friendships generally do not, subject to professional judgment.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2022. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.

About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A county public defender's office with nearly fifty lawyers asked how personal relationships with lawyers in the prosecutor's office affect conflicts. The Board answered seven questions, anchored to the material-limitation conflict in Prof.Cond.R. 1.7(a)(2) and the family-relationship guidance in Prof.Cond.R. 1.7, cmt. [21].

On spouses, the Board concluded that lawyers closely related by blood or marriage ordinarily may not represent opposing parties in the same or a substantially related matter without informed written consent, because of the presumption of shared confidences and divided loyalty. When the spouses are a prosecutor and a criminal defense lawyer in the same jurisdiction, the Board stated the best practice is for the prosecutor's office to assign a different prosecutor and screen the prosecutor-spouse. On imputation, a personal conflict from a close family relationship is not imputed to other lawyers in either firm (Prof.Cond.R. 1.10(a); 1.7, cmt. [21]) and, within a government office, is not imputed under Prof.Cond.R. 1.11, cmt. [2]. So other firm lawyers, and the lawyer-spouse facing other prosecutors in the spouse's office, may proceed, unless that particular lawyer's own close personal relationship with the assigned prosecutor creates a significant risk of material limitation.

On other relationships, the Board adopted the framework of ABA Formal Op. 494 (2020). It treated cohabiting, domestic-partner, engaged, or exclusive intimate relationships like marriage, requiring disclosure and informed written consent. For friendships, it distinguished close friends (disclosure and consent required) from limited friendships and acquaintances (generally no disclosure required, though the lawyer may choose to disclose), and gave factors for sorting them. Roommates are evaluated by the same friendship factors. The Board also addressed the content of disclosure: a generic "household member" description may be misleading under Prof.Cond.R. 7.1 when the relationship is actually a spouse or intimate partner, so the disclosure must accurately describe the relationship, the material risks, and the alternatives (Prof.Cond.R. 1.0(f), 1.4).

In practice

Under this opinion, lawyers who are spouses, or in a marriage-equivalent intimate relationship, may not represent opposing parties in the same or a substantially related matter without informed written consent, and in the prosecutor/defense setting the Board identifies reassignment and screening of the prosecutor-spouse as the best practice. Per the opinion, those personal conflicts are not imputed to other firm or office lawyers, who must instead evaluate their own relationship with the specific opposing lawyer for a significant risk of material limitation. The opinion holds that close friendships require disclosure and informed written consent, while acquaintances and limited friendships generally do not, and that when disclosure is required it must accurately state the nature of the relationship rather than use a vague label.

Common questions

Q: Can a prosecutor and a defense lawyer who are married handle opposite sides of the same case?

A: The opinion concludes not without informed written consent from each client; the Board adds that the best practice is for the prosecutor's office to assign a different prosecutor and screen the prosecutor-spouse.

Q: Does one lawyer's spousal conflict disqualify the rest of the firm or office?

A: No. The opinion concludes a personal conflict from a close family relationship is not imputed to other lawyers (Prof.Cond.R. 1.10(a); 1.7, cmt. [21]) or, within a government office, under Prof.Cond.R. 1.11, cmt. [2], so other lawyers assess only their own relationships.

Q: Do friendships between opposing counsel require disclosure?

A: Per the opinion, a close friendship requires disclosure and informed written consent, while a limited friendship or acquaintance generally does not, though the lawyer may choose to disclose; the opinion gives factors for telling them apart.

Q: Is it enough to tell the client that opposing counsel is a "household member"?

A: The opinion concludes that a generic "household member" description may be misleading under Prof.Cond.R. 7.1 when the person is a spouse or intimate partner, because it omits material facts; an accurate description of the relationship is required.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Prof.Cond.R. 1.7 (concurrent conflicts; Model Rule 1.7) and its comments [14] and [21], Prof.Cond.R. 1.9 (former clients), Prof.Cond.R. 1.10 (imputation within a firm), and Prof.Cond.R. 1.11 (government lawyers), together with Prof.Cond.R. 1.4 (communication), 7.1 (truthful communications), and the informed-consent definition in Prof.Cond.R. 1.0(f). It adopts the relationship framework of ABA Formal Op. 494 (2020).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

Ohio Prof.Cond.R. 1.7(a)(2), 1.7(b) and cmts. [14], [21] (Model Rule 1.7)
Ohio Prof.Cond.R. 1.10(a); 1.11(d) and cmt. [2] (imputation)
Ohio Prof.Cond.R. 1.4; 7.1 and cmt. [2]; 1.0(f) (communication; informed consent)

Other opinions cited:

ABA Formal Op. 494 (2020): conflicts arising from personal relationships
N.C. State Bar Formal Op. 2019-3 (2019): intimate relationships and conflicts
Ohio Adv. Op. 2016-12; Adv. Op. 2019-05: material-limitation conflicts and government-lawyer consent

Source

Landing page: https://ohioadvop.org/advisory-opinion-index/
Original PDF: https://www.ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Adv.Op_.-2022-06-Final.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

OPINION 2022-06
Issued June 10, 2022
Withdraws Adv. Op. 1993-7

   Conflicts Arising out of Personal Relationships with Opposing Counsel1

SYLLABUS: Spouses may not represent opposing parties without informed, written
consent of the affected clients. When a prosecutor-spouse and criminal defense lawyer-
spouse are practicing in the same jurisdiction, the best practice is for the prosecutor’s
office to assign another prosecuting attorney to the case and screen the prosecutor-spouse
from any matter involving his or her spouse.

    Other lawyers in the lawyer-spouse’s law firm may represent criminal defendants

without disclosure and consent, so long as the lawyer does not have a close personal
relationship with the specific prosecutor assigned to the case. The lawyer-spouse may
represent criminal defendants without disclosure and consent so long as the lawyer-
spouse does not have a close personal relationship with the specific prosecutor assigned
to the case. If a lawyer shares a close personal relationship with the prosecutor assigned,
the lawyer must obtain informed written consent from the client.

    Domestic partners, individuals in an intimate relationship, close friends, and

roommates have the same duties as those in spousal relationships in evaluating potential
conflicts of interest. Lawyers who are domestic partners or in intimate relationships are
advised to adhere to the client consent and disclosure obligations applicable to married
lawyers. Lawyers in other relationships should consider the characteristics present in the
relationship and exercise professional judgment regarding client disclosure and consent.

    At a minimum, a lawyer seeking client consent to a conflict should disclose any

1 Though this advisory opinion is specifically directed at criminal defense lawyers and prosecutors, the
Board recommends application to other representational situations where opposing counsel have
significant personal relationships.
disclosure should contain the above information, the precise nature of the relationship
giving rise to the to the conflict, and alternatives to the representation.

This nonbinding advisory opinion is issued by the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct
in response to a prospective or hypothetical question regarding the application of
ethics rules applicable to Ohio judges and lawyers. The Ohio Board of Professional
Conduct is solely responsible for the content of this advisory opinion, and the advice
contained in this opinion does not reflect and should not be construed as reflecting the
opinion of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Questions regarding this advisory opinion
should be directed to the staff of the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct.
65 SOUTH FRONT STREET, 5TH FLOOR, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-3431
Telephone: 614.387.9370 Fax: 614.387.9379
www.bpc.ohio.gov

PATRICIA A. WISE                                                                 RICHARD A. DOVE
     CHAIR                                                                            DIRECTOR

HON. D. CHRIS COOK D. ALLAN ASBURY
VICE- CHAIR SENIOR COUNSEL
KRISTI R. MCANAUL
COUNSEL

                                   OPINION 2022-06
                                  Issued June 10, 2022
                               Withdraws Adv. Op. 1993-7

      Conflicts Arising out of Personal Relationships with Opposing Counsel1

      Other lawyers in the lawyer-spouse’s law firm may represent criminal defendants

      Domestic partners, individuals in an intimate relationship, close friends, and

lawyers. Lawyers in other relationships should consider the characteristics present in the
relationship and exercise professional judgment regarding client disclosure and consent.

   At a minimum, a lawyer seeking client consent to a conflict should disclose any

shared financial or personal interests, explain the fact that there is a presumption of
confidences and loyalty between those in a personal relationship, and explain the risks of
breach of the duty to loyalty and confidentiality based on that relationship. A written
disclosure should contain the above information, the precise nature of the relationship
giving rise to the to the conflict, and alternatives to the representation.

QUESTIONS PRESENTED:

   1) May a prosecutor and a criminal defense lawyer who are spouses represent
      opposing parties in the same matter or in substantially related matters?

   2) May other lawyers in the criminal defense lawyer’s firm represent defendants
      who are prosecuted by a firm member’s spouse or other lawyers in the
      prosecutor’s office?

   3) May a lawyer married to a prosecutor represent criminal defendants
      prosecuted by other lawyers in the same prosecutor’s office?

   4) Do domestic partners, individuals living together in an intimate relationship,
      close friends, or roommates share the same duties as those in spousal
      relationships?

   5) If disclosure is required when opposing parties are living together, must the
      lawyer disclose the “spousal relationship” or is a more general disclosure of
      “household member” sufficient?

   6) What implications must be discussed with the client?

   7) What information should be contained in any written waiver signed by a
      client?

APPLICABLE RULES: Prof.Cond.R. 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11.

OPINION: The requesting lawyer is the county public defender in a county that handles
thousands of criminal cases per year. The county public defender’s office has almost fifty
Op. 2022-06 3

lawyers on staff. Some of the lawyers on staff may have personal relationships with
lawyers in the prosecutor’s office.

Question 1: Opposing Counsel Spouses

   A conflict of interest exists when there is a substantial risk that a lawyer’s ability

to consider, recommend, or carry out an appropriate course of action for a client will be
materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to a third person or by the lawyer’s
own personal interest. Prof.Cond.R. 1.7(a)(2). The Rules of Professional Conduct address
conflicts arising when opposing counsel are closely related by blood or marriage in
Prof.Cond.R. 1.7, cmt. [21]:

   When lawyers who are closely related by blood or marriage represent
   different clients in the same matter or in substantially related matters, there
   may be a substantial risk that client confidences will be revealed and that
   the lawyer’s family relationship will interfere with both loyalty and
   independent professional judgment. As a result, each client is entitled to
   know of the existence and implications of the relationship between the
   lawyers before the lawyer agrees to undertake the representation. Thus, a
   lawyer related to another lawyer, e.g., as parent, child, sibling, or spouse,
   ordinarily may not represent a client in a matter where the related lawyer
   represents another party, unless each client gives informed, written
   consent.

   The ethical concerns regarding spouses or those involved in intimate

personal relationships representing opposing parties arise from the nature of the
underlying relationship. Inherent characteristics of an intimate personal or
spousal relationship may include the presumption of shared confidences, feelings
of loyalty to the significant other, and the potential for shared financial, business,
property, or personal interests. Thus, spouses may not represent opposing parties
Op. 2022-06 4

in the same or a substantially related matter without obtaining informed written
consent from their respective clients.2

Question 2: Other Lawyers in Criminal Defense Law Firm

     The Rules of Professional Conduct address imputation of personal conflicts to

members of a firm in Prof.Cond.R. 1.10 and the comments to Prof.Cond.R. 1.7.
Prof.Cond.R. 1.10(a) indicates that when “the prohibition is based on a personal interest
of the prohibited lawyer and does not present a significant risk of materially limiting the
representation of the client by the remaining lawyers in the firm” then the conflict is not
imputed to other members of the firm. Comment [21] to Rule 1.7 further clarifies that
“[t]he disqualification arising from a close family relationship is personal and ordinarily
is not imputed to members of firms with whom the lawyers are associated.”

     The concerns about the characteristics of intimate personal or spousal

relationships referenced above are typically absent when other law firm members
represent criminal defendants prosecuted by a firm member’s spouse or other
prosecutors in the prosecutor’s office. Thus, any personal prohibition of the lawyer-
spouse from representing a criminal defendant need not be rigidly imputed to other
members of the law firm. The question then arises as to whether disclosure and consent
is necessary.

     Firm members must assess whether their own personal relationship with their

colleague and the colleague’s prosecutor-spouse presents a significant risk of materially
limiting the representation of the client. The mere possibility of subsequent harm from a
potential material limitation conflict, by itself, does not require disclosure and consent.
Prof.Cond.R. 1.7, cmt. [14]. Adv. Op. 2016-12. The lawyer should consider the nature
and degree of their own relationship with the colleague and the colleague’s spouse. A
potential material limitation conflict, aside from the conflicts of the spouses, could exist

2 The Board has previously cautioned government employees from seeking consent to representation
burdened by a conflict. Adv. Op. 2019-05. Rather than seek written consent to representation where a
prosecutor’s spouse is opposing counsel, the best practice is for the prosecutor’s office to assign a different
prosecuting attorney to the matter pursuant to Prof.Cond.R. 1.11(d), cmt. [2].
Op. 2022-06 5

depending on the degree of friendship the colleagues share. 3 If the firm member does
not share a close personal friendship with the prosecutor-spouse and it is unlikely that
the representation will be materially limited, then consent and disclosure is not necessary.
If the firm member has such a close personal friendship with the prosecutor-spouse that
his or her loyalty would inhibit the ability to represent the criminal defendant, then the
law firm member should not take on the representation without disclosure of the
relationship and consent of his or her client pursuant to Prof.Cond.R. 1.7(b). The Board
recommends appropriate and timely screening of the lawyer-spouse from any matters in
which the prosecutor-spouse is involved.

Question 3: Criminal Defense Lawyer Spouse and Other Prosecutors

    To determine if a lawyer-spouse may represent a client prosecuted by other

prosecutors in his or her spouse’s office, the lawyer must first look to see if the spouse’s
conflicts are imputed to other prosecutors in the office. As referenced above, comment
[21] to Prof.Cond.R. 1.7 indicates that personal conflicts due to close family relationships
are not imputed to other members of an office. See Prof.Cond.R. 1.7, cmt. [21]. Further,
Prof.Cond.R. 1.11, cmt. [2] reads, “[b]ecause of the special problems raised by imputation
within a government agency, division (d) does not impute the conflicts of a lawyer
currently serving as an officer or employee of the government to other associated
government officers or employees, although ordinarily it will be prudent to screen such
lawyers.” Therefore, the prosecutor-spouse’s conflicts are not imputed to the other
prosecutors in his or her office. For the same reasons indicated in question two, the Board
concludes that the ethical concerns related to spousal representation are absent in this
instance as well. Consequently, a lawyer married to a prosecutor may represent criminal
defendants prosecuted by other lawyers in the prosecutor-spouse’s office.

    However, the lawyer-spouse should also assess whether his or her own personal

relationship with the specific prosecutor(s) assigned to each case presents a significant
risk of materially limiting the representation of the client, aside from the conflict personal
to his or her spouse. The mere possibility of subsequent harm from a potential material
limitation conflict, by itself, does not require disclosure and consent. Prof.Cond.R. 1.7,

3Additional discussion regarding whether a friendship is likely to raise conflicts between opposing counsel
can be found in response to question four.
Op. 2022-06 6

cmt. [14]. Adv. Op. 2016-12. The lawyer should consider the nature and degree of his or
her own friendship with the prosecutor-spouse’s colleague(s).4 If the criminal defense
lawyer does not share a close personal friendship with the prosecutor colleague(s) of his
or her spouse, then disclosure and consent is unnecessary. If the criminal defense lawyer
has such a close personal friendship with his or her spouse’s colleague(s) assigned to case
that his or her loyalty would inhibit the ability to represent the criminal defendant, then
the lawyer should not take on the representation without disclosure to and consent of his
or her client pursuant to Prof.Cond.R. 1.7(b). The Board recommends appropriate and
timely screening of the prosecutor-spouse from any matters in which his or her spouse is
representing a criminal defendant.

Question 4: Duties of Lawyers Regarding Other Personal Relationships

   The Rules of Professional Conduct do not address personal relationships beyond

those of lawyers related by blood or marriage. The Board recognizes that other personal
relationships may also create conflicts of interest depending on the nature and degree of
the relationship. The American Bar Association has identified at least three different
types of relationships that may implicate conflicts of interest. Those relationships are (1)
intimate relationships, (2) friendships, and (3) acquaintances. ABA Formal Op. 20-494
(2020). The Board finds that ABA Formal Op. 20-494 provides appropriate guidance in
identifying characteristics of these types of relationships and applying them to potential
conflict situations.

Intimate Relationships

   The Board concludes that lawyers who (1) cohabitate in an intimate relationship,

(2) are classified as domestic partners, (3) are engaged to be married, or (4) are in an
exclusive intimate relationship, regardless of their living situation, should be treated in
the same manner as married couples for conflicts purposes. ABA Formal Op. 20-494
(2020). See also N.C. State Bar Formal Op. 2019-3 (2019). There is a substantial risk in
these situations that the lawyer’ s conduct will be materially limited by his or her duties
to the opposing counsel. The inherent characteristics of the spousal relationship are also
present in intimate personal relationships. These types of relationships lend themselves

aa
Op. 2022-06 7

to potential conflicts of interest for the reasons described above in question one. A client
should be informed of these relationships and potential conflicts in order to allow the
client to make an informed decision about the representation. See Prof.Cond.R. 1.4. If the
client wishes to continue the representation, informed written consent must be obtained.
Prof.Cond.R. 1.7(b).

Friendships

   Thoughtful analysis of the nature of a friendship is required in order to determine

if a conflict of interest exists and if it must be disclosed to an affected client. A lawyer
faced with opposing counsel whom he or she considers a friend must exercise
professional judgment in determining the action to take. The Board offers the following
factors to consider when analyzing the nature of the relationship: (1) the degree of mutual
affinity for one another, (2) the length of the relationship, (3) whether the lawyer regularly
socializes with opposing counsel, and (4) the frequency of contact with opposing counsel.
See ABA Formal Op. 20-494 (2020).

   Engaging in some, if not all, of the following activities suggests the existence of a

close friendship: (1) regularly socializing outside of professional activities, (2) spending
time at each other’s homes, (3) coordinating activities with each other’s spouses and
children, (4) exchanging gifts at holidays or special occasions, (5) vacationing together, or
(6) sharing confidences or intimate details of their lives. Id. Conversely, one may consider
opposing counsel a friend, but not a close friend, because of their past relationship in
college, law school, or while working together after many years. Despite this shared past,
they may only stay in touch through occasional correspondence or periodically meet up
when their schedules permit but do not go out of their way to regularly see one another.
Id. These types of friendships do not create a close relationship.

   There is a substantial risk that a lawyer may forgo taking appropriate action on

behalf of a client when opposing counsel is a close friend. For example, the lawyer may
forgo filing a motion for sanctions out of loyalty to the close friend. Id. When a close
friend is opposing counsel, the lawyer must disclose the relationship and obtain informed
written consent from the client. When the lawyer regards opposing counsel as a friend
but interacts with him or her on a limited basis, the lawyer may exercise his or her
professional judgment as to whether to disclose the relationship and obtain consent.
Op. 2022-06 8

Typically, in this situation, the lawyer will not be required to disclose the relationship
and obtain informed written consent to the representation. Id. The lawyer may however
choose to disclose the relationship to maintain a positive relationship with the client. Id.

Acquaintances

   An acquaintance may be distinguished from a friend when there is little mutual

affinity and attachment between one another. See id. The lawyers may greet each other
cordially and engage in polite but relatively superficial conversation. Id. The following
may be characteristics of this type of relationship, (1) attending the same professional
events such as bar association meetings, committee meetings, board meetings, or CLE
presentations, or (2) interacting cordially with one another in shared community spaces
such as places of worship, businesses, school events, sporting events, neighborhood
events, country clubs, or gyms. Id. Because there is little risk of the representation being
materially limited in this instance, lawyers who are acquaintances do not need to disclose
the relationship to clients. Id. The lawyers may however choose to disclose the
relationship to maintain a positive relationship with the client. Id.

Roommates

   Application of conflict of interest rules is challenging when considering lawyers

who are roommates but do not share an intimate relationship. “Within the framework of
[the] rules * * * many difficult issues of professional discretion can arise.” Preamble [9].
The relationship of lawyer-roommates could resemble a close friendship, a friendship, or
one more akin to that of an acquaintance. Roommate relationships also may be short-
term or borne purely out of financial convenience. As indicated above, the mere
possibility of subsequent harm from a potential material limitation conflict does not
require disclosure and consent. Prof.Cond.R. 1.7, cmt. [14]. Adv. Op. 2016-12.

   Lawyer-roommates are advised to use the criteria referenced above describing

close friendships, friendships, and acquaintances to guide their professional judgment as
to whether to disclose and seek consent from an affected client. In exercising professional
judgment, lawyers must always be mindful of the impact to a client’s underlying matter
if a decision is made to proceed without disclosing the relationship to the affected clients.
A client whose lawyer is the roommate of opposing counsel is likely to have questions
and concerns about whether the relationship will compromise the lawyer’s duty of
Op. 2022-06 9

loyalty to the client. This concern may be heightened if the information is not disclosed
by the lawyer and later discovered by the client. The client’s concern, even if unfounded,
may lead to an unnecessary appeal resulting in delay and potentially greater expense for
the client. While not strictly required under the rules, lawyers may choose to disclose the
relationship to maintain a positive relationship with the client. In these situations, the
Board advises that lawyers err on the side of caution.

   Regardless of the lawyer’s final determination regarding disclosure, lawyers

living together must take appropriate steps to ensure client confidentiality. Examples of
such steps include password protecting devices, taking phone calls in a location where
they cannot be overheard, and using care to secure any written materials brought into a
common living arrangement.

Question 5: Disclosure of Relationship

   When disclosing to a client a personal relationship with opposing counsel that may

impact the representation, the disclosure should reflect an accurate description of the
relationship. First, a lawyer may not make or use a false or misleading communication
about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services. Prof.Cond.R. 7.1. “A truthful statement is
misleading if it omits a fact necessary to make the lawyer’s communication considered as
a whole not materially misleading.” Id. at cmt. [2]. Second, a lawyer must communicate
adequate information to allow the client to make informed decisions about the
representation. Prof.Cond.R. 1.4. When considering if a conflict of interest is present and
if the client is comfortable consenting to representation, the nature of the relationship
between opposing counsel is a material fact. Therefore, when a personal relationship is
required to be revealed, an accurate description of that relationship is necessary. A
general statement that opposing counsel is a “household member” of the lawyer may be
misleading because it lacks specificity and omits material facts. This may be especially
true if opposing counsel is the spouse or intimate partner of the lawyer. It may be that a
client would be comfortable waiving a conflict if opposing counsel is simply a roommate,
which the description of “household member” may infer, but not comfortable consenting
to a conflict if opposing counsel is a spouse or an intimate partner.
Op. 2022-06 10

Question 6: Implications to be Discussed

   Depending on the type of personal relationship, there may be several implications

related to a conflict of interest that should be discussed with a client before obtaining
consent to representation. First, in a spousal or intimate relationship there is a hybrid of
interests, such as financial, business, property, and personal interests that reasonably
might affect the exercise of a lawyer’s independent judgment on behalf of a client.
Second, there is a presumption of shared confidences between spouses and those in
intimate relationships that creates a substantial risk of inadvertent breach of the duty of
loyalty to the client, including the duty to preserve client confidences and information
related to the representation. Finally, a client should be advised that the lawyer may feel
a duty of loyalty to his or her spouse, an intimate partner, or even a close friend that may
impede the lawyer’s ability to represent the client. For example, the lawyer may refrain
from making certain arguments if related to opposing counsel’s performance in
prosecution of the matter or forgo filing a motion for sanctions based on loyalty to the
individual. This list of potential implications which should be discussed is not exhaustive
as specific factual circumstances unique to each situation may be present.

Question 7: Informed Consent

   Informed consent requires that a lawyer obtaining consent to representation

burdened by a conflict communicate adequate information and explanation about the
material risks of and reasonably available alternatives to the proposed representation.
See Prof.Cond.R. 1.0(f). At a minimum, in this context, the information contained in a
written conflict waiver should include the precise nature of the relationship that
prompted the disclosure, any material risks giving rise to the conflict, such as those
described above in question six, and any reasonable alternatives to the representation,
such as assignment of another lawyer in the office or obtaining other counsel altogether.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2022 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.