skip navigation
search

End-of-life notice: American Legal Ethics Library

As of March 1, 2013, the Legal Information Institute is no longer maintaining the information in the American Legal Ethics Library. It is no longer possible for us to maintain it at a level of completeness and accuracy given its staffing needs. It is very possible that we will revive it at a future time. At this point, it is in need of a complete technological renovation and reworking of the "correspondent firm" model which successfully sustained it for many years.

Many people have contributed time and effort to the project over the years, and we would like to thank them. In particular, Roger Cramton and Peter Martin not only conceived ALEL but gave much of their own labor to it. We are also grateful to Brad Wendel for his editorial contributions, to Brian Toohey and all at Jones Day for their efforts, and to all of our correspondents and contributors. Thank you.

We regret any inconvenience.

Some portions of the collection may already be severely out of date, so please be cautious in your use of this material.


Oregon Legal Ethics

1.18   Rule 1.18 Duties to Prospective Clients

1.18:100   Comparative Analysis of Oregon Rule

Primary OR References:
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.18, Other Jurisdictions
Commentary:
OR Commentary:

MR 1.18 was added in February 2002. The Reporter's explanation of the change reads as follows:

Rule 1.18 is a proposed new Rule in response to the Commission's concern that important events occur in the period during which a lawyer and prospective client are considering whether to form a client-lawyer relationship. For the most part, the current Model Rules do not address that pre-retention period.

1.18:101      Model Rule Comparison

Oregon has not adopted the new model rule.

1.18:200   Definition of "Prospective Client"

Primary OR References:
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.18, Other Jurisdictions
Commentary:
OR Commentary:

Oregon has not adopted the new model rule.

1.18:300   Confidentiality of Communications with a Prospective Client

Primary OR References:
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.18, Other Jurisdictions
Commentary:
OR Commentary:

Oregon has not adopted the new model rule.

1.18:400   Conflicts of Interest Arising Out of Communications with a Prospective Client

Primary OR References:
Background References: ABA Model Rule 1.18, Other Jurisdictions
Commentary:
OR Commentary:

Oregon has not adopted the new model rule.

1.18:410      Conflict with an Existing Client

Oregon has not adopted the new model rule.

1.18:420      Consent of Prospective Client to an Existing Conflict of Interest

Oregon has not adopted the new model rule.

1.18:430      Screening to Cure an Imputed Conflict of Interest

Oregon has not adopted the new model rule.