Under Rule 6.3, may a lawyer serve as a director of a legal services organization that serves clients with interests adverse to the lawyer's client?

Under Rule 6.3, may a lawyer serve as a director of a legal services organization that serves clients with interests adverse to the lawyer's client?

• A. Yes, always allowed.
• B. Yes, but only if the organization serves no clients adverse to the lawyer's clients.
• C. Yes, provided there is no decision incompatible with Rule 1.7 and no material adverse effect on representation.
• D. No, never allowed.

Answer: (C)

Rule 6.3 allows a lawyer to serve as a director, officer, or board member of a nonprofit or legal services organization even if that organization serves clients whose interests may be adverse to the lawyer’s client. The key limits are that the lawyer’s independent professional judgment must not be impaired and the representation of the lawyer’s client must not suffer a material adverse effect. In practice, this means you may take the board role, but you must avoid any board decisions that would be incompatible with your obligations under Rule 1.7 (concurrent conflicts) or that would materially harm your client’s interests. If a matter arises that would create such a conflict or risk, you should refrain from participating in that decision or step away from the board in that area. In some situations, you may also discuss with the client and obtain appropriate consent, but the core idea is preserving the client’s loyalty and the lawyer’s independent judgment. That’s why this option is correct: you may serve on the board as long as there is no incompatible decision and no material adverse effect on the representation.

Rule 6.3 allows a lawyer to serve as a director, officer, or board member of a nonprofit or legal services organization even if that organization serves clients whose interests may be adverse to the lawyer’s client. The key limits are that the lawyer’s independent professional judgment must not be impaired and the representation of the lawyer’s client must not suffer a material adverse effect. In practice, this means you may take the board role, but you must avoid any board decisions that would be incompatible with your obligations under Rule 1.7 (concurrent conflicts) or that would materially harm your client’s interests. If a matter arises that would create such a conflict or risk, you should refrain from participating in that decision or step away from the board in that area. In some situations, you may also discuss with the client and obtain appropriate consent, but the core idea is preserving the client’s loyalty and the lawyer’s independent judgment. That’s why this option is correct: you may serve on the board as long as there is no incompatible decision and no material adverse effect on the representation.