Current through Register Vol. 54, No. 44, November 2, 2024
(a) A
lawyer may provide an evaluation of a matter affecting a client for the use of
someone other than the client if the lawyer reasonably believes that making the
evaluation is compatible with other aspects of the lawyer's relationship with
the client.
(b) When the lawyer
knows or reasonably should know that the evaluation is likely to affect the
client's interests materially and adversely, the lawyer shall not provide the
evaluation unless the client gives informed consent.
(c) Except as disclosure is authorized in
connection with a report of an evaluation, information relating to the
evaluation is otherwise protected by Rule
1.6.
Comment:
Definition
(1) An evaluation may be performed at the
client's direction or when impliedly authorized in order to carry out the
representation. See Rule 1.2. Such an evaluation may be for the primary purpose
of establishing information for the benefit of third parties, for example, an
opinion concerning the title of property rendered at the behest of a vendor for
the information of a prospective purchaser, or at the behest of a borrower for
the information of a prospective lender. In some situations, the evaluation may
be required by a government agency for example, an opinion concerning the
legality of the securities registered for sale under the securities laws. In
other instances, the evaluation may be required by a third person, such as a
purchaser of a business.
(2) A
legal evaluation should be distinguished from an investigation of a person with
whom the lawyer does not have a client-lawyer relationship. For example, a
lawyer retained by a purchaser to analyze a vendor's title to property does not
have a client-lawyer relationship with the vendor. So also, an investigation
into a person's affairs by a government lawyer, or by special counsel employed
by the government, is not an evaluation as that term is used in this Rule. The
question is whether the lawyer is retained by the person whose affairs are
being examined. When the lawyer is retained by that person, the general rules
concerning loyalty to client and preservation of confidences apply, which is
not the case if the lawyer is retained by someone else. For this reason, it is
essential to identify the person by whom the lawyer is retained. This should be
made clear not only to the person under examination, but also to others to whom
the results are to be made available.
Duties Owed to Third Person and
Client
(3) When the
evaluation is intended for the information or use of a third person, a legal
duty to that person may or may not arise. That legal question is beyond the
scope of this Rule. However, since such an evaluation involves a departure from
the normal client-lawyer relationship, careful analysis of the situation is
required. The lawyer must be satisfied as a matter of professional judgment
that making the evaluation is compatible with other functions undertaken in
behalf of the client. For example, if the lawyer is acting as advocate in
defending the client against charges of fraud, it would normally be
incompatible with that responsibility for the lawyer to perform an evaluation
for others concerning the same or a related transaction. Assuming no such
impediment is apparent, however, the lawyer should advise the client of the
implications of the evaluation, particularly the lawyer's responsibilities to
third persons and the duty to disseminate the findings.
Scope of Evaluation
(4) The quality of an evaluation depends on
the freedom and extent of the investigation upon which it is based. Ordinarily
a lawyer should have whatever latitude of investigation seems necessary as a
matter of professional judgment. Under some circumstances, however, the terms
of the evaluation may be limited. For example, certain issues or sources may be
categorically excluded, or the scope of search may be limited by time
constraints or the noncooperation of persons having relevant information. Any
such limitations which are material to the evaluation should be described in
the report. If after a lawyer has commenced an evaluation, the client refuses
to comply with the terms upon which it was understood the evaluation was to
have been made, the lawyer's obligations are determined by law, having
reference to the terms of the client's agreement and the surrounding
circumstances. In no circumstances is the lawyer permitted to knowingly make a
false statement of material fact or law in providing an evaluation under this
Rule. See Rule 4.1.
Confidential
Information
(5)
Information relating to an evaluation is protected by Rule
1.6. In many situations,
providing an evaluation to a third party poses no significant risk to the
client; thus, the lawyer may be impliedly authorized to disclose information to
carry out the representation. See Rule
1.6(a). Where,
however, it is reasonably likely that providing the evaluation will affect the
client's interests materially and adversely, the lawyer must first obtain the
client's consent after the client has been adequately informed concerning the
important possible effects on the client's interests. See Rule
1.6(a) and Rule
1.0(e) (Informed Consent).
Financial Auditors' Requests for Information
(6) When a
question concerning the legal situation of a client arises at the instance of
the client's financial auditor and the question is referred to the lawyer, the
lawyer's response may be made in accordance with procedures recognized in the
legal profession. Such a procedure is set forth in the American Bar Association
Statement of Policy Regarding Lawyers' Responses to Auditors' Requests for
Information, adopted in 1975.