I wanted to get a broad opinion on a scenario I recently
heard about second hand.
We all know the old saying "ONE LAWYER WILL STARVE IN A TOWN, BUT TWO WILL PROSPER"
Here is an example of what happens in a small town lawyer pool.
In the scenario I hear tell about, one "professional" is working for
two clients (Client/Owner X and Client/Contractor Y) in unrelated disputes.
Client/Owner X has hired Lawyer A, and has a claim against Contractor J.
Contractor J has hired Lawyer B.
The "professional" in this dispute is supporting Client X and Lawyer A's side of the case.
At the same time
Client/Contractor Y has hired Lawyer B to defend against a suit from Owner K.
Owner K has hired Lawyer A.
The "professional" in this dispute is supporting Client Y and Lawyer B's side of the case.
Does it seem there could be a conflict of interest arising from these
working relationships?
A PLS does not advocate for a client. They are paid by the client but are supposed to be neutral and work in the public interest.
Is the professional in these cases a fact witness or expert witness? It could make a difference in how some people see it.
Probably OK, but ......
the first thing is to have full disclosure to ALL parties and signed, informed consent forms from all parties.
And the surveyor would have to be very careful not to divulge confidential communications.
I have not been for and against an attorney at the same time, but I have been for and against with some time lapse. In one case I was the worst thing that God ever created and the other I was the best thing East of the Mississippi - all from the mouth of the same attorney.
Probably OK, but ......
I knew a pretty good Land Surveyor, not God's gift to Land Surveying but pretty smart, certainly not infallible. Sort of like me ;-). He was working as the Expert on our side (State Parks).
I was out in the field Surveying the boundary in dispute and happened to encounter the other Surveyor/Expert out there, we were careful about Ex Parte communication and mostly talked about CLSA (he is one of the founders from the 1960s). Interesting encounter that was.
One thing he told us was the Deputy Attorney General had relayed in a meeting that our Expert is the greatest Land Surveyor in California, almost God, really his stuff only has the most pleasantist aroma LOL. At the time I thought it was funny but he seemed a bit annoyed about it which I can understand.
It really shouldn't be a conflict of interest due to the nature of our testimony. But to a world that "buys" the best judgment money can afford..it doesn't look like it might smell right. But professional testimony cannot advocate anyone's interests in my opinion. The slight-of-hand is done by the attorney. The questions he asks are at times not as important as what he doesn't ask.
I had (have) a law firm that I have worked with many times over. The two partners were really sharp land attorneys and I enjoyed working with both of them.
A few years back the younger of the two spun off and started his own shindig. I didn't know it until the other had called me concerning a project. He wanted to know if his ex-partner had called me yet. Seems as though the two ex-partners were representing opposing clients on some law suit. He wanted to get to me first before his ex-partner did.
As it worked out, the litigants settled ( 🙁 what a shame..) and I had nothing to do with the case. I did ask him if there were any hard feelings and he laughed. Apparently attorneys that have once worked together often find themselves representing opposite interests down the road. I don't guess it's really any different that all the different companies all of us have worked for over the years.
