CI-883

May 31, 1983

SYLLABUS

It is not improper to render a legal opinion concerning a matter at the request of someone who is already represented by another with respect to that matter.

When rendering a second opinion, it is not necessary to inquire as to the identity of the predecessor lawyer except to determine that conflicts of interests to not exist.

When rendering a second opinion, the predecessor lawyer should not be contacted unless such contact is authorized by the client.

References: MCPR DR 4-101(A) and (B), DR 5-101(A).

TEXT

A lawyer asks about the propriety of rendering a legal opinion concerning a matter at the request of someone who is already represented by another lawyer with respect to that matter. In short, it has been asked if it is appropriate to render "second opinions." If so, should the lawyer determine the identity of the predecessor lawyer or contact that lawyer prior to rendering an opinion.

We know of no ethical prohibition which would prevent a lawyer from rendering a second opinion to a client who is already represented by another attorney in the same matter provided that the client initiates the request for advice. The client should be free to seek whatever legal advice deemed proper. This includes the right to consult with as many lawyers as deemed appropriate.

The lawyer rendering the second opinion need not inquire as to the identity of the other lawyer. In fact, the lawyer rendering the second opinion probably should inquire as to the identity of the other lawyer to determine whether the first lawyer is affiliated with the lawyer rendering the second opinion in some way. Aside from the facts necessary to give an opinion about the legal issue, the second lawyer's inquiry should be only sufficient to determine whether there is any conflict of interest. MCPR DR 5-101(A).

The first lawyer should not be contacted unless the client authorizes such contact. MCPR DR 4-101(A) and (B). When a client seeks a second opinion it is quite possible that there are question concerning the advice rendered by another lawyer. If the client knows the second lawyer will contact that client's lawyer, the client might feel inhibited in fully representing the facts to the second lawyer as the client might fear retaliatory action by the first lawyer for seeking additional advice.

Essentially, it is the client's interests lawyers are attempting to serve. If the client desires a second opinion on a question, he should be able to get it. If the client believes that best interests will be served by keeping communication concerning the second opinion confidential, confidentiality should be preserved even with respect to the client's original lawyer.