Conflicts of interest are among the most consequential — and most preventable — ethical issues in law practice. This program provides a structured approach to identifying and analyzing conflicts under the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, documenting decisions, and building systems that detect conflicts early, before they threaten the representation.
Learning Objectives:
- Recognize common conflict scenarios under the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct 1.7 through 1.11
- Apply a consistent framework to analyze consentable versus non-consentable conflicts
- Use informed consent and documentation to support defensible conflict decisions
- Design conflict-check systems that scale with firm growth and matter complexity
- Why Conflicts Still Trip Lawyers Up
- Why conflicts are among the most common and preventable ethics violations
- How conflicts arise in ordinary practice — not just litigation
- Framing conflicts as a practice‑management and systems issue, not just a legal one
- Roadmap for the hour: spot → analyze → document → prevent
- Spotting Conflicts Early: The Usual Suspects
- The Core Rules (high‑level)
- Snapshot of ABA Model Rules 1.7–1.11
- Current clients, former clients, prospective clients
- Imputed conflicts and screening
- Special rules for government lawyers
- Snapshot of ABA Model Rules 1.7–1.11
- Common Conflict Triggers Lawyers Miss
- Intake and consultation conflicts (“almost clients”)
- Dual or joint representation in transactions and family matters
- Organizational clients vs. individuals inside the organization
- Conflicts created by firm growth, laterals, and staff relationships
- Personal‑interest conflicts
- The Core Rules (high‑level)
- Analyzing Conflicts: A Repeatable Framework
- The Analysis Checklist
- Is there direct adversity or a material limitation?
- Who is the client — for conflicts purposes?
- Is the conflict consentable or non‑consentable?
- When Consent Cannot Fix the Problem
- Claims by one client against another in the same matter
- Conflicts prohibited by law or tribunal rules
- Situations where competent, diligent representation is not possible
- Decline, Withdraw, or Proceed?
- Avoiding “hot‑potato” conflicts
- Timing and communication considerations
- The Analysis Checklist
- Informed Consent and Defensible Documentation
- What Informed Consent Really Requires
- Informed consent as defined in ABA Model Rule 1.0(e)
- Explaining risks, alternatives, and consequences in plain language
- When written consent is required vs. best practice
- Documenting the Decision
- What to document even when consent is declined
- Creating a record that supports later scrutiny
- Why undocumented analysis is a hidden risk
- What Informed Consent Really Requires
- Prevention Systems: Conflict Checks That Scale
- When conflict checks must occur (intake, new parties, new matters, laterals)
- Assigning responsibility vs. accountability
- Moving from informal memory‑based checks to repeatable systems
- Training staff to flag and escalate issues early
- Culture: making conflicts checks routine, not punitive
- Key Takeaways
- Most conflict disasters start as missed intake or process failures
- A simple framework and documentation discipline prevent downstream harm
- Small system improvements dramatically reduce risk
- Conclusion and Q&A
- Open questions from attendees
- Optional discussion of audience‑submitted hypotheticals
- Practical “what would you do next?” wrap‑up
This webinar is divided into section summaries, which you can scan for key points and then dive into the sections that interest you the most.
Please note this AI-generated summary provides a general overview of the webinar but may not capture all details, nuances, or the exact words of the speaker. For complete accuracy, please refer to the original webinar recording.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association
Charity Anastasio is Practice and Ethics Counsel for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. Charity practiced law for five years, practicing in estate planning, probate, and family law. She has been working at bar associations, assisting lawyers for over a decade. She is an ethics nerd and practice management ambassador who advises lawyers through consultations, publications, workshops, and presentations. There is a pathway to a better life in the law and Charity thrives on helping lawyers find it. She is a member of the ABA Law Practice Division, was named an ABA 2020 Women in Legal Tech Honoree, and a 2024 V|Lex/Fastcase 50. Charity is on the 2026 ABA TECHSHOW Board. Read More ›
*CLE credit is only available to Justia Connect Pros. Not a Pro? Upgrade today>>
Status: Approved
Format: On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Ethics
Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2026
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Ethics
Earn Credit Until: July 29, 2031
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Legal Ethics
Earn Credit Until: June 30, 2028
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Enhanced Ethics
Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2026
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Ethics
Earn Credit Until: July 29, 2028
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Professional Responsibility - Ethics / Civility / Professionalism / Sexual Harassment Prevention
Earn Credit Until: July 29, 2028
Status: Approved
Format: On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Professional Responsibility
Earn Credit Until: July 30, 2028
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.20 Ethics/Professionalism
Earn Credit Until: July 29, 2027
Status: Approved
Format: On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Ethics
Earn Credit Until: February 28, 2027
Status: Approved
Format: On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Attorney Professional Conduct
Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2026
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Ethics, Professionalism, or Substance Abuse
Earn Credit Until: July 29, 2028
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Legal Ethics/Professional Responsibility
Difficulty: All Levels
Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2026
Status: Pending
Format: On-Demand
Credits: TBD
Earn Credit Until: TBD
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Ethics
Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2026
Status: Approved
Format: Live (Virtual), On-Demand
Credits: 1.00 Ethics
Earn Credit Until: July 30, 2031
Status: Approved
Format: On-Demand
Credits: 1.20 Legal Ethics, etc.
Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2029
This presentation is approved for one hour of Ethics CLE credit in Alabama, one hour of Ethics CLE credit in Alaska, one hour of Legal Ethics CLE credit in California, one hour of Enhanced Ethics CLE credit in Delaware, one hour of Ethics CLE credit in Hawaii, one hour of Professional Responsibility - Ethics / Civility / Professionalism / Sexual Harassment Prevention CLE credit in Illinois, one hour of Professional Responsibility CLE credit in Nebraska, one hour of Ethics CLE credit in North Carolina, one hour of Attorney Professional Conduct CLE credit in Ohio, one hour of Ethics, Professionalism, or Substance Abuse CLE credit in Pennsylvania, one hour of Legal Ethics/Professional Responsibility CLE credit in South Carolina (all levels), one hour of Ethics CLE credit in Utah, one hour of Ethics CLE credit in Vermont, and one hour of Legal Ethics, etc. CLE credit in West Virginia. This program has been approved by the Board on Continuing Legal Education of the Supreme Court of New Jersey for 1.20 hours of total CLE credit. Of these, 1.20 qualify as total hours of credit for Ethics/Professionalism. An application for accreditation of this activity has been submitted to the MCLE Committee of the State Bar of Texas and is pending.
Justia only reports attendance in jurisdictions in which a particular Justia CLE Webinar is officially accredited. Lawyers may need to self-submit their certificates for CLE credit in jurisdictions not listed above.
Note that CLE credit, including partial credit, cannot be earned outside of the relevant accreditation period. To earn credit for a course, a lawyer must watch the entire course within the relevant accreditation period. Lawyers who have viewed a presentation multiple times may not be able to claim credit in their jurisdiction more than once. Justia reserves the right, at its discretion, to grant an attendee partial or no credit, in accordance with viewing duration and other methods of verifying course completion.
At this time, Justia only offers CLE courses officially accredited in certain states. Lawyers may generate a generic attendance certificate to self-submit credit in their own jurisdiction, but Justia does not guarantee that lawyers will receive their desired CLE credit through the self-submission or reciprocity process.