# Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.2: Rule 1.2. Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority between Client and > Connecticut · Court rules · In force URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_2 ## Section - **Citation:** Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.2 - **Heading:** Rule 1.2. Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority between Client and - **Jurisdiction:** Connecticut - **Kind:** Court rules - **Status:** In force - **Text as of:** August 14, 2026 - **Source:** Compiled text - **Location:** Connecticut Court Rules / Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct / Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.2 ## Text Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority between Client and Lawyer (a) Subject to subsections (c) and (d), a lawyer shall abide by a client’s decisions concerning the objectives of representation and, as required by Rule 1.4, shall consult with the client as to the means by which they are to be pursued. A lawyer may take such action on behalf of the client as is impliedly authorized to carry out the representation. A lawyer shall abide by a client’s decision whether to settle a matter. In a criminal case, the lawyer shall abide by the client’s decision, after consultation with the lawyer, as to a plea to be entered, whether to waive jury trial and whether the client will testify. Subject to revocation by the client and to the terms of the contract, a client’s decision to settle a matter shall be implied where the lawyer is retained to represent the client by a third party obligated under the terms of a contract to provide the client with a defense and indemnity for the loss, and the third party elects to settle a matter without contribution by the client. (b) A lawyer’s representation of a client, including representation by appointment, does not constitute an endorsement of the client’s political, economic, social or moral views or activities. (c) A lawyer may limit the scope of the representation if the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent. Such informed consent shall not be required when a client cannot be located despite reasonable efforts where the lawyer is retained to represent a client by a third party that is obligated by contract to provide the client with a defense. activities. (c) A lawyer may limit the scope of the representation if the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent. Such informed consent shall not be required when a client cannot be located despite reasonable efforts where the lawyer is retained to represent a client by a third party that is obligated by contract to provide the client with a defense. (d) A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows 10 is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may (1) discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client; (2) counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law; or (3) counsel or assist a client regarding conduct expressly permitted by Connecticut law, provided that the lawyer counsels the client about the legal consequences, under other applicable law, of the client’s proposed course of conduct. (P.B. 1978-1997, Rule 1.2.) (Amended June 26, 2006, to take effect Jan. 1, 2007; amended June 29, 2007, to take effect Jan. 1, 2008; amended June 13, 2014, to take effect Jan. 1, 2015.) COMMENTARY: Allocation of Authority between Client and Lawyer. Subsection (a) confers upon the client the ultimate authority to determine the purposes to be served by legal representation, within the limits imposed by law and the lawyer’s professional obligations. The decisions specified in subsection (a), such as whether to settle a civil matter, must also be made by the client. See Rule 1.4 (a) (1) for the lawyer’s duty to communicate with the client about such decisions. With respect to the means by which the client’s objectives are to be pursued, the lawyer shall consult with the client as required by Rule 1.4 (a) (2) and may take such action as is impliedly authorized to carry out the representation. On occasion, however, a lawyer and a client may disagree about the means to be used to accomplish the client’s objectives cate with the client about such decisions. With respect to the means by which the client’s objectives are to be pursued, the lawyer shall consult with the client as required by Rule 1.4 (a) (2) and may take such action as is impliedly authorized to carry out the representation. On occasion, however, a lawyer and a client may disagree about the means to be used to accomplish the client’s objectives. Clients normally defer to the special knowledge and skill of their lawyer with respect to the means to be used to accomplish their objectives, particularly with respect to technical, legal and tactical matters. Conversely, lawyers usually defer to the client regarding such questions as the expense to be incurred and concern for third persons who might be adversely affected. Because of the varied nature of the matters about which a lawyer and client might disagree and because the actions in question may implicate the interests of a tribunal or other persons, this Rule does not prescribe how such disagreements are to be resolved. Other law, however, may be applicable and should be consulted by the lawyer. The lawyer should also consult with the client and seek a mutually acceptable resolution of the disagreement. If such efforts are unavailing and the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement with the client, the lawyer may withdraw from the representation. See Rule 1.16 (b) (4). Conversely, the client may resolve the disagreement by discharging the lawyer. See Rule 1.16 (a) (3). At the outset of a representation, the client may authorize the lawyer to take specific action on the client’s behalf without further consultation. Absent a material change in circumstances and subject to Rule 1.4, a lawyer may rely on such an advance authorization. The client may, however, revoke such authority at any time. In a case in which the client appears to be suffering diminished capacity, the lawyer’s duty to abide by the client’s decisions is to be guided by reference to Rule 1.14. Independence from Client’s Views or Activities on. Absent a material change in circumstances and subject to Rule 1.4, a lawyer may rely on such an advance authorization. The client may, however, revoke such authority at any time. In a case in which the client appears to be suffering diminished capacity, the lawyer’s duty to abide by the client’s decisions is to be guided by reference to Rule 1.14. Independence from Client’s Views or Activities. Legal representation should not be denied to people who are unable to afford legal services or whose cause is controversial or the subject of popular disapproval. By the same token, representing a client does not constitute approval of the client’s views or activities. Agreements Limiting Scope of Representation. The scope of services to be provided by a lawyer may be limited by agreement with the client or by the terms under which the lawyer’s services are made available to the client. For example, when a lawyer has been retained by an insurer to represent Rule 1.3 an insured, the representation may be limited to matters related to the insurance coverage. A limited representation may be appropriate because the client has limited objectives for the representation. In addition, the terms upon which representation is undertaken may exclude specific means that might otherwise be used to accomplish the client’s objectives. Such limitations may exclude actions that the client thinks are too costly or that the lawyer regards as repugnant or imprudent. Nothing in Rule 1.2 shall be construed to authorize limited appearances before any tribunal unless otherwise authorized by law or rule. Although this Rule affords the lawyer and client substantial latitude to limit the scope of representation, the limitation must be reasonable under the circumstances ctions that the client thinks are too costly or that the lawyer regards as repugnant or imprudent. Nothing in Rule 1.2 shall be construed to authorize limited appearances before any tribunal unless otherwise authorized by law or rule. Although this Rule affords the lawyer and client substantial latitude to limit the scope of representation, the limitation must be reasonable under the circumstances. If, for example, a client’s objective is limited to securing general information about the law the client needs in order to handle a common and typically uncomplicated legal problem, the lawyer and client may agree that the lawyer’s services will be limited to a brief telephone consultation. Such a limitation, however, would not be reasonable if the time allotted was not sufficient to yield advice upon which the client could rely. Although an agreement for a limited representation does not exempt a lawyer from the duty to provide competent representation, the limitation is a factor to be considered when determining the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation. See Rule 1.1. All agreements concerning a lawyer’s representation of a client must accord with the Rules of Professional Conduct and other law. See, e.g., Rules 1.1, 1.8 and 5.6. Criminal, Fraudulent and Prohibited Transactions. Subsection (d) prohibits a lawyer from knowingly counseling or assisting a client to commit a crime or fraud. This prohibition, however, does not preclude the lawyer from giving an honest opinion about the actual consequences that appear likely to result from a client’s conduct. Nor does the fact that a client uses advice in a course of action that is criminal or fraudulent of itself make a lawyer a party to the course of action. There is a critical distinction between presenting an analysis of legal aspects of questionable conduct and recommending the means by which a crime or fraud might be committed ual consequences that appear likely to result from a client’s conduct. Nor does the fact that a client uses advice in a course of action that is criminal or fraudulent of itself make a lawyer a party to the course of action. There is a critical distinction between presenting an analysis of legal aspects of questionable conduct and recommending the means by which a crime or fraud might be committed. When the client’s course of action has already begun and is continuing, the lawyer’s responsibility is especially delicate. The lawyer is required to avoid assisting the client, for example, by drafting or delivering documents that the lawyer knows are fraudulent or by suggesting how the wrongdoing might be concealed. A lawyer may not continue assisting a client in conduct that the lawyer originally believed legally proper but then discovers is criminal or fraudulent. The lawyer must, therefore, withdraw from the representation of the client in the matter. See Rule 1.16 (a). In some cases, withdrawal alone might be insufficient. It may be necessary for the lawyer to give notice of the fact of withdrawal and to disaffirm any opinion, document, affirmation or the like. See Rule 4.1. Where the client is a fiduciary, the lawyer may be charged with special obligations in dealings with a beneficiary. Subsection (d) applies whether or not the defrauded party is a party to the transaction. Hence, a lawyer must not participate in a transaction to effectuate criminal or fraudulent avoidance of tax liability. Subsection (d) does not preclude undertaking a criminal defense incident to a general retainer for legal services toa lawfulenterprise.Subsection(d)(2)recognizesthatdetermining the validity or interpretation of a statute or regulation may require a course of action involving disobedience of the statute or regulation or of the interpretation placed upon it by governmental authorities tax liability. Subsection (d) does not preclude undertaking a criminal defense incident to a general retainer for legal services toa lawfulenterprise.Subsection(d)(2)recognizesthatdetermining the validity or interpretation of a statute or regulation may require a course of action involving disobedience of the statute or regulation or of the interpretation placed upon it by governmental authorities. Subsection (d) (3) is intended to permit counsel to provide legal services to clients without being subject to discipline under these Rules notwithstanding that the 11 Copyrighted by the Secretary of the State of the State of Connecticut services concern conduct prohibited under federal or other law but expressly permitted under Connecticut law, e.g., conduct under An Act Concerning the Palliative Use of Marijuana, Public Act 12-55, effective Oct. 1, 2012. Subsection (d) (3) shall not provide a defense to a presentment filed pursuant to Practice Book Section 2-41 against an attorney found guilty of a serious crime in another jurisdiction. If a lawyer comes to know or reasonably should know that a client expects assistance not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law or if the lawyer intends to act contrary to the client’s instructions, the lawyer must consult with the client regarding the limitations on the lawyer’s conduct. See Rule 1.4 (a) (5). ## Nearby sections - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.0 Rule 1.0. Terminology](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_0.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.1 Rule 1.1. Competence](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_1.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.2 Rule 1.2. Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority between Client and](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_2.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.3 Rule 1.3. Diligence](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_3.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.4 Rule 1.4. Communication](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_4.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.5 Rule 1.5. Fees](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_5.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.6 Rule 1.6. Confidentiality of Information](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_6.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.7 Rule 1.7. Conflict of Interest: Current Clients](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_7.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.8 Rule 1.8. Conflict](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_8.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.9 Rule 1.9. Duties to Former Clients](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_9.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.10 Rule 1.10. Imputation of Conflicts of Interest:](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_10.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.11 Rule 1.11. Special Conflicts of Interest for Former and Current Government Officers and](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_11.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.12 Rule 1.12. Former Judge, Arbitrator, Mediator or Other Third-Party Neutral](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_12.md) - [Conn. R. Prof'l Conduct 1.13 Rule 1.13. Organization as Client](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_13.md) --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_CT_RPC_R1_2. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.