# What might happen?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [July 17, 2000, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791 "2000-07-17T03:24:06Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 6\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![zebbmx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/958977/32.png) [@zebbmx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zebbmx)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2000, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791/1 "2000-07-17T03:24:06Z")

</div>

i dont no much about law but what might happen if a scenario like this came about:  
Woman 1 harasses Woman 2 with threats  
Woman 2 sues Woman 1  
Women 1 and 2 both have the same lawyers  
what would happen there?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2000, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791/2 "2000-07-17T03:30:09Z")

</div>

Lawyer would have to choose between the two. The non-chosen would select another.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tcburnett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c5a1d2/32.png) [@tcburnett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tcburnett)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2000, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791/3 "2000-07-17T03:41:01Z")

</div>

Nope. The lawyer couldn’t represent either of them. It would be a conflict of interest, but I guarantee the lawyer would bow out anyway.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![zebbmx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/958977/32.png) [@zebbmx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zebbmx)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2000, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791/4 "2000-07-17T16:16:47Z")

</div>

damn so then theyd havta get all new lawyers why wouldnt the lawyer represent just one?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/bc8723/32.png) [@Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unauthorized_Cinnamon)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2000, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791/5 "2000-07-17T16:28:53Z")

</div>

The lawyer couldn’t represent one because of the danger of bias (he doesn’t want to annoy either woman, because he would lose a client, so how can he oppose her effectively?), and the possibility that he has knowledge about his would-be opponent due to the confidential relationship he has had with her. The upshot is that even if there is an appearance of impropriety, the lawyer should not represent a client. (FYI, in some cases clients can give informed waiver of the conflict, but in this case, I think the lawyer should RUN.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stolichnaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bcef8e/32.png) [@stolichnaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stolichnaya)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2000, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-might-happen/25791/6 "2000-07-17T16:31:18Z")

</div>

Because it’s an ethical violation. As tcburnett indicated, it is known as “conflict of interest” and it interferes with the lawyer’s ability to provide a competent and zealous representation to either party when both parties are involved in a business relationship with him/her (i.e. a retainer, which I inferred from your OP).