RULE 1.2 SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION ALLOCATION OF AUTHORITY BETWEEN CLIENT AND LAWYER
A Subject to paragraphs (c) and (d), a
lawyer shall abide by a client's decisions concerning the
objectives of representation , subject to paragraphs (c), (d) and (e), and,
where appropriate as
required by Rule 1.4, shall consult with the client as to the means by which they are
to be pursued.
A lawyer may take such action on behalf of the client as impliedly authorized to carry out
representation. A lawyer shall abide by a client's decision whether to accept an
offer or settlement
of settle a matter. In a criminal case, the lawyer shall abide by the client's
consultation with the lawyer, as to a plea to be entered, whether to waive jury trial and whether
client will testify.
(b) A lawyer's representation of a client, including representation by appointment, does not constitute an endorsement of the client's political, economic, social or moral views or activities.
(c) A lawyer may limit the
objectives scope of
the representation if the client consents after
(d) A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law.
(e) When a lawyer knows that a client expects assistance not
permitted by these rules or other law,
the lawyer shall consult with the client regarding the relevant limitations on the lawyer's
Scope of Representation
Both lawyer and client have authority and responsibility in the
objectives and means of
representation. The Paragraph (a) confers upon the client has
the ultimate authority to determine
the purposes to be served by legal representation, within the limits imposed by law and the
professional obligations. Within those limits, a client also has a right to consult with the
about the means to be used in pursuing those objectives. However, where many routine matters
involved, a system of limited or occasional consultation may be arranged with the client
the lawyer to choose the means to be used in pursuing objectives without specific consultation
the client. Practical exigency may permit a lawyer to reasonably interpret a client's prior
concerning the objectives of any representation to authorize the lawyer to act for a client without
prior consultation. A lawyer is not required to pursue objectives or employ means simply
a client may wish that the lawyer do so. In the event the lawyer is unable to abide by a client's
decisions concerning the objectives of representation or the means by which they are to be
the lawyer shall terminate the representation pursuant to Rule 1.16. A clear distinction between
objectives and means sometimes cannot be drawn, and in many cases the client-lawyer
partakes of a joint undertaking. In questions of means, the lawyer should assume responsibility
technical and legal tactical issues, but it is appropriate to defer to the client regarding such
as the expense to be incurred and concern for third persons who might be adversely
decisions specified in paragraph (a), such as whether to settle a civil matter, must also be made
the client. See Rule 1.4(a)(1) for the lawyer's duty to communicate with the client about such
decisions. With respect to the means by which the client's objectives are to be pursued, the
shall consult with the client as required by Rule 1.4(a)(2) and may take such action as is
authorized to carry out the representation.
 On occasion, however, a lawyer and a client may disagree about the means to be used to accomplish the client's objectives. Clients generally defer to the special knowledge and skill of their lawyer with respect to the means to be used to accomplish their objectives, particularly with respect to technical, legal and tactical matters. Conversely, lawyers usually defer to the client regarding such questions as the expense to be incurred and concern for third persons who might be adversely affected. The lawyer should consult with the client and seek a mutually acceptable resolution of any disagreement. If such efforts are unavailing and the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement with the client, the lawyer may withdraw from the representation. See Rule 1.16(b)(4). Conversely, the client may resolve the disagreement by discharging the lawyer. See Rule 1.16(a)(4).
 At the outset of a representation, the client may authorize the lawyer to take specific action on the client's behalf without further consultation. Absent a material change in circumstances and subject to Rule 1.4, a lawyer may rely on such an advance authorization. The client may, however, revoke such authority at any time.
 In a case in which the client appears to
mental disability have limited capacity, the
lawyer's duty to abide by the client's decisions is to be guided by reference to Rule 1.14.
Independence From Client's Views or Activities
 Legal representation should not be denied to people who are unable to afford legal services, or whose cause is controversial or the subject of popular disapproval. By the same token, representing a client does not constitute approval of the client's views or activities.
Services Limited in Objectives or Means Agreements
Limiting Scope of Representation
objectives or scope of services to be provided by
a lawyer may be limited by agreement
with the client or by the terms under which the lawyer's services are made available to the client.
Paragraph (c) allows the lawyer to limit the scope of representation if the client consents.
the client's consent in writing the preferred practice. Lack of a writing may make it difficult to
client consent if a dispute arises later. For example, a retainer may be for a
purpose. Representation provided through a legal aid agency may be subject to limitations on
types of cases the agency handles. When a lawyer has been retained by an insurer to
insured, for example, the representation may be limited to matters related to the
The A limited representation may be appropriate because the client has
limited objectives for the
representation. In addition, terms upon which representation is undertaken may exclude
objectives or means that might otherwise be used to accomplish the client's
limitations may exclude objectives or means actions that the client thinks
are too costly or that the
lawyer regards as repugnant or imprudent.
An agreement concerning the scope of representation must accord with
these Rules and other
law. Thus, the client may not be asked to agree to representation so limited in scope as to violate
Rule 1.1, or to surrender the right to terminate the lawyer's services or the right to settle litigation
that the lawyer might wish to continue. Although an agreement for a limited
representation does not
exempt a lawyer from the duty to provide competent representation, the limitation is a factor to
considered when determining the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation
necessary for the representation. See Rule 1.1.
 All agreements concerning a lawyer's representation of a client must accord with these Rules and other law. See, e.g., Rules 1.1, 1.8 and 5.6.
or Fraudulent, and Prohibited
A Paragraph (d) prohibits a lawyer from knowingly
counseling or assisting a client to commit
a crime or fraud. The prohibition, however, does not preclude the lawyer is
required to give from
giving an honest opinion about the actual consequences that appear likely to result from
conduct. The Nor does the fact that a client uses advice in a course of
action that is criminal or
fraudulent does not, of itself, make a lawyer a party to the course of action.
However, a lawyer may
not knowingly assist a client in criminal or fraudulent conduct. There is a critical
between presenting an analysis of legal aspects of questionable conduct and recommending the
means by which a crime or fraud might be committed with impunity.
 When the client's course of action has already begun and is continuing, the
responsibility is especially delicate. The lawyer is not permitted to reveal the client's
except where required or permitted
in by Rule 1.6. However,
the The lawyer is required to avoid
furthering the purpose assisting the client, for example, by drafting
or delivering documents that the
lawyer knows are fraudulent or by suggesting how it the
wrongdoing might be concealed. A lawyer
may not continue assisting a client in conduct that the lawyer originally supposes
is supposed was
legally proper but then discovers is criminal or fraudulent. Withdrawal The
lawyer must, therefore,
withdraw from the representation , therefore, may be required of the client in
the matter. See Rule
1.16(a). In some cases, withdrawal alone might be insufficient. It may be necessary for the
to give notice of the fact of withdrawal and to disaffirm any opinion, document, affirmation or
like. See Rule 4.1.
 Where the client is a fiduciary, the lawyer may be charged with special obligations in dealings with the beneficiary.
 Paragraph (d) applies whether or not the defrauded party is a party to the
should must not participate in a sham
transaction ; for example, a transaction to effectuate
criminal or fraudulent escape avoidance of tax liability. Paragraph (d)
does not preclude
undertaking a criminal defense incident to a general retainer for legal services to a lawful
The last clause of paragraph (d) recognizes that determining the validity or interpretation of a
or regulation may require a course of action involving disobedience of the statute or regulation
of the interpretation placed upon it by governmental authorities.
 If a lawyer comes to know or reasonably should know that a client expects assistance not permitted by these Rules or other law or if the lawyer intends to act contrary to the client's instructions, the lawyer must consult with the client regarding the limitations on the lawyer's conduct. See Rule 1.4(a)(5).
Reference: Minutes of the Professional Conduct Subcommittee of the Attorney
Committee as amended 10/21/83, 02/03/84, 03/16/84, 05/23/84
06/27/84; Minutes of the
Joint Committee on Attorney Standards on 11/15/02, 02/28/03, 09/25/03, 11/19/04.