An often-overlooked rule of professional ethics is MRPC 1.2: Scope of Representation. This rule provides the framework for the ethical division of authority between lawyer and client. Under this rule, attorneys are responsible for providing legal counsel, while clients retain the ultimate authority over the objectives of representation. Understanding and respecting this division is essential to ethical, effective lawyering.
Lawyers are advisors, strategists, and advocates. A lawyer should aim to counsel, inform, and represent, not to control. At the heart of a lawyer’s role as counselor is a duty to support clients in making informed, lawful decisions, even when those decisions differ from what the lawyer might personally choose.
CLIENT AUTHORITY: DECISIONS THAT BELONG TO THE CLIENT
Rule 1.2(a) makes clear that a lawyer “shall abide by a client’s decisions concerning the objectives of representation.” In practice, this includes critical decisions such as whether to file or dismiss a lawsuit or to accept or offer a settlement. In criminal matters, this includes how to plead and whether or not the client will testify.
For example, consider a breach of contract case in which the client is offered a settlement. Even if the attorney believes the settlement undervalues the claim, the decision to accept or reject the settlement ultimately rests with the client. MRPC 1.4 requires that a lawyer must communicate a settlement offer or plea bargain, which underlines the client’s right to accept or reject any offer.1 Similarly, in a family law matter, a client may prioritize preserving a co-parenting relationship over litigating for sole custody, even when the lawyer believes they might prevail in court. In these situations and others like them, the lawyer’s role is to provide thorough candid advice, not to override the client’s informed decision.
This deference to client autonomy applies only when the client’s decisions are lawful and informed. If the client’s directives are unlawful, or if their decisions suggest a misunderstanding of the risks and consequences, the attorney may need to take further steps. In some cases, this may include withdrawing from representation under MRPC 1.16.2
It’s not uncommon for clients to make choices that we as lawyers would not recommend or make ourselves. A lawyer might believe that turning down a settlement is a mistake, or that testifying in a criminal case exposes a client to unnecessary risk. But if the client understands the stakes and makes a lawful decision, the lawyer must respect it under MRPC 1.2.
Ethical representation means that the lawyer’s services must align with the client’s lawful objectives. If that alignment is no longer possible, MRPC 1.16 provides a mechanism for withdrawal.3 Until the point is reached where alignment becomes impossible, the lawyer is obligated to carry out the client’s decisions with diligence and competence, regardless of the lawyer’s personal views.
LAWYER AUTHORITY: DECISIONS THAT BELONG TO THE LAWYER
While clients control the objectives of representation, lawyers are responsible for determining the means of pursuing the client’s goals. MRPC 1.2(a) also states that a lawyer “shall consult with the client as to the means,” signaling collaboration but also preserving professional judgment.
Tactical decisions, such as how to conduct discovery, which motions to file, and which witnesses to call, are within the lawyer’s authority. A lawyer’s training and experience provide the foundation for these choices. Clients should be informed and their preferences considered, but these decisions do not require the client’s consent unless they impact the overall objectives of the representation.
At times, this can be a challenge as lawyers have a duty to both the client and the legal system. Lawyers must only assert meritorious claims and defenses,4 be truthful in communications with others,5 be candid with courts,6 and follow all other ethics rules and the law.7 The balance between client service and maintaining the integrity of the judicial system is what distinguishes legal advocacy from mere representation.
Sometimes, clients demand that lawyers take actions that are not ethically sound, which may require withdrawal. For example, a client facing a murder charge wants to assert an insanity defense. The lawyer seeks three evaluations of the client’s mental state, all which provide that the client was competent. The client demands that the lawyer present an insanity defense; however, doing so under the circumstances would violate MRPC 3.1, as this defense is not meritorious. Therefore, if the client continues to demand that the lawyer assert the insanity defense, the lawyer should seek to withdraw from representation.
LIMITED-SCOPE REPRESENTATION: CLARITY IS KEY
In 2018, the Michigan Supreme Court amended MRPC 1.2 to specifically include limited scope representation and “provide guidance for attorneys and clients who would prefer to engage in limited scope representation.”8 MRPC 1.2(c) permits attorneys to limit the scope of representation, provided the limitation is reasonable and the client gives informed consent. A lawyer may be retained solely to draft a pleading or review a settlement agreement. They may provide behind-the-scenes coaching or represent a client only during a single phase of a proceeding. These limited scope arrangements can increase access to legal services, but they must be clearly defined and in writing.9
The client must understand which services are included, which are excluded, and the limitations of the arrangement. For example, an attorney offering limited-scope help in a landlord-tenant dispute should specify whether they will appear in court or simply prepare documents for the client to file. The scope of representation should always be documented in writing to avoid any future disputes.
Limited scope representation, importantly, does limit responsibility. Lawyers must still comply with their ethical duties to act competently, communicate clearly, and avoid misleading the client about what the representation covers.
See the State Bar of Michigan website under Limited Scope Representation for more related resources.10
COMMUNICATING WITH CLIENTS: INFORMED CONSENT
A lawyer’s ability to guide clients depends on timely, effective communication. MRPC 1.4 requires attorneys to keep clients reasonably informed about their case, consult with them on important decisions, and explain matters in a way that the client will understand, which allows for informed consent.
Obtaining the client’s informed consent is required and serves as the cornerstone of nearly every duty a lawyer owes to the client, whether in communication, strategy, or scope. Informed consent requires the client to understand the material facts, the options available, the risks involved, and the likely consequences.
The best protection for both lawyer and client is documentation. A well-drafted engagement letter, a follow-up email summarizing a discussion, or a written confirmation of a client’s decision can all serve as evidence that the client was properly advised and agreed to proceed. For example, if a divorce client chooses to waive discovery in exchange for a quicker resolution, the lawyer should explain the potential loss of financial transparency and document that conversation in writing. No matter what kind of law you are practicing, the most important thing you can do to protect your client and yourself is to obtain informed consent regarding the client’s decision and confirm that consent in writing.
PRACTICAL STEPS TO STAY ALIGNED WITH RULE 1.2
- Clarify objectives early. Ask what the client wants to achieve. Revisit this periodically as the case evolves.
- Explain risks and options. Don’t assume the client understands. Spell it out. Clearly and effectively communicate with the client as required by MRPC 1.4.
- Define the scope in writing. Especially in limited-scope matters, be precise.
- Respect decisions, even when you disagree. Offer strong advice but carry out lawful instructions.
- Document consent and key decisions in writing. It protects you and the client.
CONCLUSION: RESPECTING ROLES, UPHOLDING TRUST
The lawyer-client relationship is fundamentally a partnership. Clients bring their values, goals, and life experiences. Lawyers bring their legal training, practical judgment, and professional responsibility. MRPC 1.2 codifies that balance: Clients choose the destination, and lawyers map the route. By respecting that division of roles, lawyers meet their ethical duties and build the kind of trust that leads to stronger advocacy, better outcomes, and greater professional satisfaction.