# SCR 20:1.7: SCR 20:1.7. Conflicts of interest: current clients

> Wisconsin · Court rules · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_7

## Section

- **Citation:** SCR 20:1.7
- **Heading:** SCR 20:1.7. Conflicts of interest: current clients
- **Jurisdiction:** Wisconsin
- **Kind:** Court rules
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules / SCR Chapter 20A - Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys (Preamble through 20:1.18) / SCR 20:1.7

## Text

Conflicts of interest: current clients
(a) Except as provided in par. (b), a lawyer shall not represent a
client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A
concurrent conflict of interest exists if:

(1) the representation of one client will be directly adverse to
another client; or

(2) there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more
clients will be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to
another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest
of the lawyer.

(b) Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of
interest under par. (a), a lawyer may represent a client if:

(1) the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to
provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client;

(2) the representation is not prohibited by law;

(3) the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by
one client against another client represented by the lawyer in the same
litigation or other proceeding before a tribunal; and

(4) each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in a
writing signed by the client.

WISCONSIN COMMENT

The Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule differs from the Model Rule in requiring
informed consent to be confirmed in a writing "signed by the client."

ABA COMMENT

General Principles
[1] Loyalty and independent judgment are essential elements in the lawyer's relationship
to a client. Concurrent conflicts of interest can arise from the lawyer's responsibilities to another
client, a former client or a third person or from the lawyer's own interests. For specific Rules
regarding certain concurrent conflicts of interest, see Rule 1.8. For former client conflicts of interest,
see Rule 1.9. For conflicts of interest involving prospective clients, see Rule 1.18. For definitions
of "informed consent" and "confirmed in writing," see Rule 1.0(e) and (b)
ities to another
client, a former client or a third person or from the lawyer's own interests. For specific Rules
regarding certain concurrent conflicts of interest, see Rule 1.8. For former client conflicts of interest,
see Rule 1.9. For conflicts of interest involving prospective clients, see Rule 1.18. For definitions
of "informed consent" and "confirmed in writing," see Rule 1.0(e) and (b).
[2] Resolution of a conflict of interest problem under this Rule requires the lawyer to: (1)

clearly identify the client or clients; (2) determine whether a conflict of interest exists; (3) decide
whether the representation may be undertaken despite the existence of a conflict, i.e., whether the
conflict is consentable; and (4) if so, consult with the clients affected under paragraph (a) and obtain
their informed consent, confirmed in writing. The clients affected under paragraph (a) include both
of the clients referred to in paragraph (a)(1) and the one or more clients whose representation might
be materially limited under paragraph (a)(2).
[3] A conflict of interest may exist before representation is undertaken, in which event the
representation must be declined, unless the lawyer obtains the informed consent of each client under
the conditions of paragraph (b). To determine whether a conflict of interest exists, a lawyer should
adopt reasonable procedures, appropriate for the size and type of firm and practice, to determine in
both litigation and non-litigation matters the persons and issues involved. See also Comment to Rule
5.1. Ignorance caused by a failure to institute such procedures will not excuse a lawyer's violation
of this Rule. As to whether a client-lawyer relationship exists or, having once been established, is
continuing, see Comment to Rule 1.3 and Scope
and type of firm and practice, to determine in
both litigation and non-litigation matters the persons and issues involved. See also Comment to Rule
5.1. Ignorance caused by a failure to institute such procedures will not excuse a lawyer's violation
of this Rule. As to whether a client-lawyer relationship exists or, having once been established, is
continuing, see Comment to Rule 1.3 and Scope.
[4] If a conflict arises after representation has been undertaken, the lawyer ordinarily must
withdraw from the representation, unless the lawyer has obtained the informed consent of the client
under the conditions of paragraph (b). See Rule 1.16. Where more than one client is involved,
whether the lawyer may continue to represent any of the clients is determined both by the lawyer's
ability to comply with duties owed to the former client and by the lawyer's ability to represent
adequately the remaining client or clients, given the lawyer's duties to the former client. See Rule
1.9. See also Comments [5] and [29].
[5] Unforeseeable developments, such as changes in corporate and other organizational
affiliations or the addition or realignment of parties in litigation, might create conflicts in the midst
of a representation, as when a company sued by the lawyer on behalf of one client is bought by
another client represented by the lawyer in an unrelated matter. Depending on the circumstances,
the lawyer may have the option to withdraw from one of the representations in order to avoid the
conflict. The lawyer must seek court approval where necessary and take steps to minimize harm to
the clients. See Rule 1.16. The lawyer must continue to protect the confidences of the client from
whose representation the lawyer has withdrawn. See Rule 1.9(c).
Identifying Conflicts of Interest: Directly Adverse
have the option to withdraw from one of the representations in order to avoid the
conflict. The lawyer must seek court approval where necessary and take steps to minimize harm to
the clients. See Rule 1.16. The lawyer must continue to protect the confidences of the client from
whose representation the lawyer has withdrawn. See Rule 1.9(c).
Identifying Conflicts of Interest: Directly Adverse

[6] Loyalty to a current client prohibits undertaking representation directly adverse to
that client without that client's informed consent. Thus, absent consent, a lawyer may
not act as an advocate in one matter against a person the lawyer represents in some
other matter, even when the matters are wholly unrelated. The client as to whom the
representation is directly adverse is likely to feel betrayed, and the resulting damage
to the client-lawyer relationship is likely to impair the lawyer's ability to represent the
client effectively. In addition, the client on whose behalf the adverse representation is
undertaken reasonably may fear that the lawyer will pursue that client's case less
effectively out of deference to the other client, i.e., that the representation may be
materially limited by the lawyer's interest in retaining the current client. Similarly, a
directly adverse conflict may arise when a lawyer is required to cross-examine a client
who appears as a witness in a lawsuit involving another client, as when the testimony
will be damaging to the client who is represented in the lawsuit. On the other hand,
simultaneous representation in unrelated matters of clients whose interests are only
economically adverse, such as representation of competing economic enterprises in
unrelated litigation, does not ordinarily constitute a conflict of interest and thus may
not require consent of the respective clients.
[7] Directly adverse conflicts can also arise in transactional matters
. On the other hand,
simultaneous representation in unrelated matters of clients whose interests are only
economically adverse, such as representation of competing economic enterprises in
unrelated litigation, does not ordinarily constitute a conflict of interest and thus may
not require consent of the respective clients.
[7] Directly adverse conflicts can also arise in transactional matters. For example, if a
lawyer is asked to represent the seller of a business in negotiations with a buyer
represented by the lawyer, not in the same transaction but in another, unrelated matter,
the lawyer could not undertake the representation without the informed consent of
each client.
Identifying Conflicts of Interest: Material Limitation
[8] Even where there is no direct adverseness, a conflict of interest exists if there is a
significant risk that a lawyer's ability to consider, recommend or carry out an
appropriate course of action for the client will be materially limited as a result of the
lawyer's other responsibilities or interests. For example, a lawyer asked to represent
several individuals seeking to form a joint venture is likely to be materially limited in
the lawyer's ability to recommend or advocate all possible positions that each might
take because of the lawyer's duty of loyalty to the others. The conflict in effect
forecloses alternatives that would otherwise be available to the client. The mere
possibility of subsequent harm does not itself require disclosure and consent. The
critical questions are the likelihood that a difference in interests will eventuate and, if
it does, whether it will materially interfere with the lawyer's independent professional
judgment in considering alternatives or foreclose courses of action that reasonably
should be pursued on behalf of the client
mere
possibility of subsequent harm does not itself require disclosure and consent. The
critical questions are the likelihood that a difference in interests will eventuate and, if
it does, whether it will materially interfere with the lawyer's independent professional
judgment in considering alternatives or foreclose courses of action that reasonably
should be pursued on behalf of the client.
Lawyer's Responsibilities to Former Clients and Other Third Persons
[9] In addition to conflicts with other current clients, a lawyer's duties of loyalty and
independence may be materially limited by responsibilities to former clients under
Rule 1.9 or by the lawyer's responsibilities to other persons, such as fiduciary duties
arising from a lawyer's service as a trustee, executor or corporate director.
Personal Interest Conflicts

[10] The lawyer's own interests should not be permitted to have an adverse effect on
representation of a client. For example, if the probity of a lawyer's own conduct in a
transaction is in serious question, it may be difficult or impossible for the lawyer to
give a client detached advice. Similarly, when a lawyer has discussions concerning
possible employment with an opponent of the lawyer's client, or with a law firm
representing the opponent, such discussions could materially limit the lawyer's
representation of the client. In addition, a lawyer may not allow related business
interests to affect representation, for example, by referring clients to an enterprise in
which the lawyer has an undisclosed financial interest. See Rule 1.8 for specific Rules
pertaining to a number of personal interest conflicts, including business transactions
with clients. See also Rule 1.10 (personal interest conflicts under Rule 1.7 ordinarily
are not imputed to other lawyers in a law firm)
rests to affect representation, for example, by referring clients to an enterprise in
which the lawyer has an undisclosed financial interest. See Rule 1.8 for specific Rules
pertaining to a number of personal interest conflicts, including business transactions
with clients. See also Rule 1.10 (personal interest conflicts under Rule 1.7 ordinarily
are not imputed to other lawyers in a law firm).
[11] When lawyers representing different clients in the same matter or in substantially
related matters are closely related by blood or marriage, there may be a significant 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 that lawyer is representing another party, unless
each client gives informed consent. The disqualification arising from a close family
relationship is personal and ordinarily is not imputed to members of firms with whom
the lawyers are associated. See Rule 1.10.
[12] A lawyer is prohibited from engaging in sexual relationships with a client unless
the sexual relationship predates the formation of the client-lawyer relationship. See
Rule 1.8(j).
Interest of Person Paying for a Lawyer's Service
[13] A lawyer may be paid from a source other than the client, including a co-client,
if the client is informed of that fact and consents and the arrangement does not
compromise the lawyer's duty of loyalty or independent judgment to the client. See
Rule 1.8(f)
tionship predates the formation of the client-lawyer relationship. See
Rule 1.8(j).
Interest of Person Paying for a Lawyer's Service
[13] A lawyer may be paid from a source other than the client, including a co-client,
if the client is informed of that fact and consents and the arrangement does not
compromise the lawyer's duty of loyalty or independent judgment to the client. See
Rule 1.8(f). If acceptance of the payment from any other source presents a significant
risk that the lawyer's representation of the client will be materially limited by the
lawyer's own interest in accommodating the person paying the lawyer's fee or by the
lawyer's responsibilities to a payer who is also a co-client, then the lawyer must
comply with the requirements of paragraph (b) before accepting the representation,
including determining whether the conflict is consentable and, if so, that the client has
adequate information about the material risks of the representation.

Prohibited Representations

[14] Ordinarily, clients may consent to representation notwithstanding a conflict.
However, as indicated in paragraph (b), some conflicts are nonconsentable, meaning
that the lawyer involved cannot properly ask for such agreement or provide
representation on the basis of the client's consent. When the lawyer is representing
more than one client, the question of consentability must be resolved as to each client.
[15] Consentability is typically determined by considering whether the interests of the
clients will be adequately protected if the clients are permitted to give their informed
consent to representation burdened by a conflict of interest. Thus, under paragraph
t's consent. When the lawyer is representing
more than one client, the question of consentability must be resolved as to each client.
[15] Consentability is typically determined by considering whether the interests of the
clients will be adequately protected if the clients are permitted to give their informed
consent to representation burdened by a conflict of interest. Thus, under paragraph
(b)(1), representation is prohibited if in the circumstances the lawyer cannot
reasonably conclude that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent
representation. See Rule 1.1 (competence) and Rule 1.3 (diligence).
[16] Paragraph (b)(2) describes conflicts that are nonconsentable because the
representation is prohibited by applicable law. For example, in some states substantive
law provides that the same lawyer may not represent more than one defendant in a
capital case, even with the consent of the clients, and under federal criminal statutes
certain representations by a former government lawyer are prohibited, despite the
informed consent of the former client. In addition, decisional law in some states limits
the ability of a governmental client, such as a municipality, to consent to a conflict of
interest.
[17] Paragraph (b)(3) describes conflicts that are nonconsentable because of the
institutional interest in vigorous development of each client's position when the clients
are aligned directly against each other in the same litigation or other proceeding before
a tribunal. Whether clients are aligned directly against each other within the meaning
of this paragraph requires examination of the context of the proceeding. Although this
paragraph does not preclude a lawyer's multiple representation of adverse parties to a
mediation (because mediation is not a proceeding before a "tribunal" under Rule
1.0(m)), such representation may be precluded by paragraph (b)(1)
. Whether clients are aligned directly against each other within the meaning
of this paragraph requires examination of the context of the proceeding. Although this
paragraph does not preclude a lawyer's multiple representation of adverse parties to a
mediation (because mediation is not a proceeding before a "tribunal" under Rule
1.0(m)), such representation may be precluded by paragraph (b)(1).
Informed Consent
[18] Informed consent requires that each affected client be aware of the relevant
circumstances and of the material and reasonably foreseeable ways that the conflict
could have adverse effects on the interests of that client. See Rule 1.0(e) (informed
consent). The information required depends on the nature of the conflict and the nature
of the risks involved. When representation of multiple clients in a single matter is
undertaken, the information must include the implications of the common
representation, including possible effects on loyalty, confidentiality and the attorney-
client privilege and the advantages and risks involved. See Comments [30] and [31]
(effect of common representation on confidentiality).
[19] Under some circumstances it may be impossible to make the disclosure necessary
to obtain consent. For example, when the lawyer represents different clients in related
matters and one of the clients refuses to consent to the disclosure necessary to permit
the other client to make an informed decision, the lawyer cannot properly ask the latter
to consent. In some cases the alternative to common representation can be that each
party may have to obtain separate representation with the possibility of incurring
additional costs. These costs, along with the benefits of securing separate
representation, are factors that may be considered by the affected client in determining
whether common representation is in the client's interests.
Consent Confirmed in Writing
the alternative to common representation can be that each
party may have to obtain separate representation with the possibility of incurring
additional costs. These costs, along with the benefits of securing separate
representation, are factors that may be considered by the affected client in determining
whether common representation is in the client's interests.
Consent Confirmed in Writing

[20] Paragraph (b) requires the lawyer to obtain the informed consent of the client,
confirmed in writing. Such a writing may consist of a document executed by the client
or one that the lawyer promptly records and transmits to the client following an oral
consent. See Rule 1.0(b). See also Rule 1.0(n) (writing includes electronic
transmission). If it is not feasible to obtain or transmit the writing at the time the client
gives informed consent, then the lawyer must obtain or transmit it within a reasonable
time thereafter. See Rule 1.0(b). The requirement of a writing does not supplant the
need in most cases for the lawyer to talk with the client, to explain the risks and
advantages, if any, of representation burdened with a conflict of interest, as well as
reasonably available alternatives, and to afford the client a reasonable opportunity to
consider the risks and alternatives and to raise questions and concerns. Rather, the
writing is required in order to impress upon clients the seriousness of the decision the
client is being asked to make and to avoid disputes or ambiguities that might later
occur in the absence of a writing.
Revoking Consent
[21] A client who has given consent to a conflict may revoke the consent and, like any
other client, may terminate the lawyer's representation at any time
s. Rather, the
writing is required in order to impress upon clients the seriousness of the decision the
client is being asked to make and to avoid disputes or ambiguities that might later
occur in the absence of a writing.
Revoking Consent
[21] A client who has given consent to a conflict may revoke the consent and, like any
other client, may terminate the lawyer's representation at any time. Whether revoking
consent to the client's own representation precludes the lawyer from continuing to
represent other clients depends on the circumstances, including the nature of the
conflict, whether the client revoked consent because of a material change in
circumstances, the reasonable expectations of the other client and whether material
detriment to the other clients or the lawyer would result.
Consent to Future Conflict
[22] Whether a lawyer may properly request a client to waive conflicts that might arise
in the future is subject to the test of paragraph (b). The effectiveness of such waivers
is generally determined by the extent to which the client reasonably understands the
material risks that the waiver entails. The more comprehensive the explanation of the
types of future representations that might arise and the actual and reasonably
foreseeable adverse consequences of those representations, the greater the likelihood
that the client will have the requisite understanding. Thus, if the client agrees to
consent to a particular type of conflict with which the client is already familiar, then
the consent ordinarily will be effective with regard to that type of conflict. If the
consent is general and open-ended, then the consent ordinarily will be ineffective,
because it is not reasonably likely that the client will have understood the material
risks involved
ding. Thus, if the client agrees to
consent to a particular type of conflict with which the client is already familiar, then
the consent ordinarily will be effective with regard to that type of conflict. If the
consent is general and open-ended, then the consent ordinarily will be ineffective,
because it is not reasonably likely that the client will have understood the material
risks involved. On the other hand, if the client is an experienced user of the legal
services involved and is reasonably informed regarding the risk that a conflict may
arise, such consent is more likely to be effective, particularly if, e.g., the client is
independently represented by other counsel in giving consent and the consent is
limited to future conflicts unrelated to the subject of the representation. In any case,
advance consent cannot be effective if the circumstances that materialize in the future
are such as would make the conflict nonconsentable under paragraph (b).
Conflicts in Litigation

[23] Paragraph (b)(3) prohibits representation of opposing parties in the same
litigation, regardless of the clients' consent. On the other hand, simultaneous
representation of parties whose interests in litigation may conflict, such as co-plaintiffs
or co-defendants, is governed by paragraph (a)(2). A conflict may exist by reason of
substantial discrepancy in the parties' testimony, incompatibility in positions in
relation to an opposing party or the fact that there are substantially different
possibilities of settlement of the claims or liabilities in question. Such conflicts can
arise in criminal cases as well as civil. The potential for conflict of interest in
representing multiple defendants in a criminal case is so grave that ordinarily a lawyer
should decline to represent more than one codefendant. On the other hand, common
representation of persons having similar interests in civil litigation is proper if the
requirements of paragraph (b) are met
h conflicts can
arise in criminal cases as well as civil. The potential for conflict of interest in
representing multiple defendants in a criminal case is so grave that ordinarily a lawyer
should decline to represent more than one codefendant. On the other hand, common
representation of persons having similar interests in civil litigation is proper if the
requirements of paragraph (b) are met.
[24] Ordinarily a lawyer may take inconsistent legal positions in different tribunals at
different times on behalf of different clients. The mere fact that advocating a legal
position on behalf of one client might create precedent adverse to the interests of a
client represented by the lawyer in an unrelated matter does not create a conflict of
interest. A conflict of interest exists, however, if there is a significant risk that a
lawyer's action on behalf of one client will materially limit the lawyer's effectiveness
in representing another client in a different case; for example, when a decision
favoring one client will create a precedent likely to seriously weaken the position
taken on behalf of the other client. Factors relevant in determining whether the clients
need to be advised of the risk include: where the cases are pending, whether the issue
is substantive or procedural, the temporal relationship between the matters, the
significance of the issue to the immediate and long-term interests of the clients
involved and the clients' reasonable expectations in retaining the lawyer. If there is
significant risk of material limitation, then absent informed consent of the affected
clients, the lawyer must refuse one of the representations or withdraw from one or
both matters.
[25] When a lawyer represents or seeks to represent a class of plaintiffs or defendants
in a class-action lawsuit, unnamed members of the class are ordinarily not considered
to be clients of the lawyer for purposes of applying paragraph (a)(1) of this Rule
n absent informed consent of the affected
clients, the lawyer must refuse one of the representations or withdraw from one or
both matters.
[25] When a lawyer represents or seeks to represent a class of plaintiffs or defendants
in a class-action lawsuit, unnamed members of the class are ordinarily not considered
to be clients of the lawyer for purposes of applying paragraph (a)(1) of this Rule. Thus,
the lawyer does not typically need to get the consent of such a person before
representing a client suing the person in an unrelated matter. Similarly, a lawyer
seeking to represent an opponent in a class action does not typically need the consent
of an unnamed member of the class whom the lawyer represents in an unrelated
matter.
Nonlitigation Conflicts

[26] Conflicts of interest under paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) arise in contexts other than
litigation. For a discussion of directly adverse conflicts in transactional matters, see
Comment [7]. Relevant factors in determining whether there is significant potential
for material limitation include the duration and intimacy of the lawyer's relationship
with the client or clients involved, the functions being performed by the lawyer, the
likelihood that disagreements will arise and the likely prejudice to the client from the
conflict. The question is often one of proximity and degree. See Comment [8].
[27] For example, conflict questions may arise in estate planning and estate
administration. A lawyer may be called upon to prepare wills for several family
members, such as husband and wife, and, depending upon the circumstances, a
conflict of interest may be present. In estate administration the identity of the client
may be unclear under the law of a particular jurisdiction. Under one view, the client
is the fiduciary; under another view the client is the estate or trust, including its
beneficiaries. In order to comply with conflict of interest rules, the lawyer should
make clear the lawyer's relationship to the parties involved
f interest may be present. In estate administration the identity of the client
may be unclear under the law of a particular jurisdiction. Under one view, the client
is the fiduciary; under another view the client is the estate or trust, including its
beneficiaries. In order to comply with conflict of interest rules, the lawyer should
make clear the lawyer's relationship to the parties involved.
[28] Whether a conflict is consentable depends on the circumstances. For example, a
lawyer may not represent multiple parties to a negotiation whose interests are
fundamentally antagonistic to each other, but common representation is permissible
where the clients are generally aligned in interest even though there is some difference
in interest among them. Thus, a lawyer may seek to establish or adjust a relationship
between clients on an amicable and mutually advantageous basis; for example, in
helping to organize a business in which two or more clients are entrepreneurs, working
out the financial reorganization of an enterprise in which two or more clients have an
interest or arranging a property distribution in settlement of an estate. The lawyer
seeks to resolve potentially adverse interests by developing the parties' mutual
interests. Otherwise, each party might have to obtain separate representation, with the
possibility of incurring additional cost, complication or even litigation. Given these
and other relevant factors, the clients may prefer that the lawyer act for all of them.
Special Considerations in Common Representation
er
seeks to resolve potentially adverse interests by developing the parties' mutual
interests. Otherwise, each party might have to obtain separate representation, with the
possibility of incurring additional cost, complication or even litigation. Given these
and other relevant factors, the clients may prefer that the lawyer act for all of them.
Special Considerations in Common Representation

[29] In considering whether to represent multiple clients in the same matter, a lawyer
should be mindful that if the common representation fails because the potentially
adverse interests cannot be reconciled, the result can be additional cost,
embarrassment and recrimination. Ordinarily, the lawyer will be forced to withdraw
from representing all of the clients if the common representation fails. In some
situations, the risk of failure is so great that multiple representation is plainly
impossible. For example, a lawyer cannot undertake common representation of clients
where contentious litigation or negotiations between them are imminent or
contemplated. Moreover, because the lawyer is required to be impartial between
commonly represented clients, representation of multiple clients is improper when it
is unlikely that impartiality can be maintained. Generally, if the relationship between
the parties has already assumed antagonism, the possibility that the clients' interests
can be adequately served by common representation is not very good. Other relevant
factors are whether the lawyer subsequently will represent both parties on a continuing
basis and whether the situation involves creating or terminating a relationship between
the parties.
[30] A particularly important factor in determining the appropriateness of common
representation is the effect on client-lawyer confidentiality and the attorney-client
privilege. With regard to the attorney-client privilege, the prevailing Rule is that, as
between commonly represented clients, the privilege does not attach
n involves creating or terminating a relationship between
the parties.
[30] A particularly important factor in determining the appropriateness of common
representation is the effect on client-lawyer confidentiality and the attorney-client
privilege. With regard to the attorney-client privilege, the prevailing Rule is that, as
between commonly represented clients, the privilege does not attach. Hence, it must
be assumed that if litigation eventuates between the clients, the privilege will not
protect any such communications, and the clients should be so advised.
[31] As to the duty of confidentiality, continued common representation will almost
certainly be inadequate if one client asks the lawyer not to disclose to the other client
information relevant to the common representation. This is so because the lawyer has
an equal duty of loyalty to each client, and each client has the right to be informed of
anything bearing on the representation that might affect that client's interests and the
right to expect that the lawyer will use that information to that client's benefit. See
Rule 1.4. The lawyer should, at the outset of the common representation and as part
of the process of obtaining each client's informed consent, advise each client that
information will be shared and that the lawyer will have to withdraw if one client
decides that some matter material to the representation should be kept from the other.
In limited circumstances, it may be appropriate for the lawyer to proceed with the
representation when the clients have agreed, after being properly informed, that the
lawyer will keep certain information confidential. For example, the lawyer may
reasonably conclude that failure to disclose one client's trade secrets to another client
will not adversely affect representation involving a joint venture between the clients
and agree to keep that information confidential with the informed consent of both
clients
e agreed, after being properly informed, that the
lawyer will keep certain information confidential. For example, the lawyer may
reasonably conclude that failure to disclose one client's trade secrets to another client
will not adversely affect representation involving a joint venture between the clients
and agree to keep that information confidential with the informed consent of both
clients.
[32] When seeking to establish or adjust a relationship between clients, the lawyer
should make clear that the lawyer's role is not that of partisanship normally expected
in other circumstances and, thus, that the clients may be required to assume greater
responsibility for decisions than when each client is separately represented. Any
limitations on the scope of the representation made necessary as a result of the
common representation should be fully explained to the clients at the outset of the
representation. See Rule 1.2(c).
[33] Subject to the above limitations, each client in the common representation has
the right to loyal and diligent representation and the protection of Rule 1.9 concerning
the obligations to a former client. The client also has the right to discharge the lawyer
as stated in Rule 1.16.

Organizational Clients
[34] A lawyer who represents a corporation or other organization does not, by virtue
of that representation, necessarily represent any constituent or affiliated organization,
such as a parent or subsidiary. See Rule 1.13(a). Thus, the lawyer for an organization
is not barred from accepting representation adverse to an affiliate in an unrelated
matter, unless the circumstances are such that the affiliate should also be considered a
client of the lawyer, there is an understanding between the lawyer and the
organizational client that the lawyer will avoid representation adverse to the client's
affiliates, or the lawyer's obligations to either the organizational client or the new
client are likely to limit materially the lawyer's representation of the other client
nces are such that the affiliate should also be considered a
client of the lawyer, there is an understanding between the lawyer and the
organizational client that the lawyer will avoid representation adverse to the client's
affiliates, or the lawyer's obligations to either the organizational client or the new
client are likely to limit materially the lawyer's representation of the other client.
[35] A lawyer for a corporation or other organization who is also a member of its
board of directors should determine whether the responsibilities of the two roles may
conflict. The lawyer may be called on to advise the corporation in matters involving
actions of the directors. Consideration should be given to the frequency with which
such situations may arise, the potential intensity of the conflict, the effect of the
lawyer's resignation from the board and the possibility of the corporation's obtaining
legal advice from another lawyer in such situations. If there is material risk that the
dual role will compromise the lawyer's independence of professional judgment, the
lawyer should not serve as a director or should cease to act as the corporation's lawyer
when conflicts of interest arise. The lawyer should advise the other members of the
board that in some circumstances matters discussed at board meetings while the
lawyer is present in the capacity of director might not be protected by the attorney-
client privilege and that conflict of interest considerations might require the lawyer's
recusal as a director or might require the lawyer and the lawyer's firm to decline
representation of the corporation in a matter.

## Nearby sections

- [SCR 20:1.0 SCR 20:1.0. Terminology](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_0.md)
- [SCR 20:1.1 SCR 20:1.1. Competence](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_1.md)
- [SCR 20:1.2 SCR 20:1.2. Scope of representation and allocation of](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_2.md)
- [SCR 20:1.3 SCR 20:1.3. Diligence](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_3.md)
- [SCR 20:1.4 SCR 20:1.4. Communication](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_4.md)
- [SCR 20:1.5 SCR 20:1.5. Fees](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_5.md)
- [SCR 20:1.6 SCR 20:1.6. Confidentiality](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_6.md)
- [SCR 20:1.7 SCR 20:1.7. Conflicts of interest: current clients](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_7.md)
- [SCR 20:1.8 SCR 20:1.8. Conflict of interest: prohibited transactions](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_8.md)
- [SCR 20:1.9 SCR 20:1.9. Duties to former clients](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_9.md)
- [SCR 20:1.10 SCR 20:1.10. Imputed disqualification: general rule](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_10.md)
- [SCR 20:1.11 SCR 20:1.11. Special conflicts of interest for former and](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_11.md)
- [SCR 20:1.12 SCR 20:1.12. Former judge, arbitrator, mediator or other 3rd-](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_12.md)
- [SCR 20:1.13 SCR 20:1.13. Organization as client](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_13.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/SRULES_WI_SCR20A_R20_1_7. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.