2005-116.

• Court: Oregon

Oregon Ethics Opinions 2005. 2005-116. FORMAL OPINION NO. 2005-116Conflicts of Interest, Current Clients:Charity and Donor Facts: Lawyer represents Charity on a continuing basis and is also a member of its board of directors. Donor asks Lawyer to represent Donor in making a sizable gift to Charity. Donor also asks Lawyer to prepare Donor's will in which Charity would be a named beneficiary. Questions: 1. May Lawyer represent both Charity and Donor in the charitable gift transaction? 2. May Lawyer represent only Donor in the charitable gift transaction? 3. May Lawyer prepare Donor's will naming Charity as a beneficiary? Conclusions: 1. No. 2. Yes, qualified. 3. Yes, qualified. Discussion: 1. The Charitable Gift. Oregon RPC 1.7 provides: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a current conflict of interest. A current conflict of interest exists if:

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

(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;

(3) the lawyer is related to another lawyer, as parent, child, sibling, spouse or domestic partner, in a matter adverse to a person whom the lawyer knows is represented by the other lawyer in the same matter.

(b) Notwithstanding the existence of a current conflict of interest under paragraph (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 obligate the lawyer to contend for something on behalf of one client that the lawyer has a duty to oppose on behalf of another client; and

(4) each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.

See also Oregon RPC 1.0(b) and (g):

(b) "Confirmed in writing," when used in reference to the informed consent of a person, denotes informed consent that is given in writing by the person or a writing that a lawyer promptly transmits to the person confirming an oral informed consent.. . . If it is not feasible to obtain or transmit the writing at the time...