Page 17
Still other courts that approve screening for paralegals compare paralegals to former
government lawyers who have neither a financial interest in the outcome of a
particular litigation, nor the choice of which clients they serve. Smart Industries Corp.
v. Superior Court County of Yuma, 876 P.2d 1176, 1184 (A A W
believe that this reasoning for treating government attorneys differently in the context of
acc ord, Hayes v.
Central States Orthopedic Specialists, Inc., 51 P.3d 562 (Okla. 2002); Model Rule 1.11 (b) and
(c).
▪ The ABA Model Rules do NOT prohibit firm representation when the conflicted person
is a paralegal, so long as the paralegal is properly screened from the case.
Comment 4 to Model Rule 1.10(a) states that the rule does not proh ibit representation by
others in the law firm where the person prohibited from involvement in a matter is a
H
participation in the matter to avoid communication to others in the firm o f confidential
Id.
Because disqualification is such a drastic consequence for lawyers and their firms, lawyers
must be especially attuned to controlling authority in the jurisdictions where they practic e.
See generally, Steve Morris and Christina C. Stipp, Ethical Conflicts Facing Litigators, ALI
“HALIABA There are various methods of screening the
nonlawyer employee within the hiring law firm from participation in or knowledge of the
case involving the client of the former law firm which, at a minimum, measures should
include admonishing the nonlawyer employee not to discuss the case with anyone in the
hiring firm, restricting the nonlawyer employee from access to the computer and paper
files related to the case, and prohibiting all attorneys and nonlawyer employees of the
hiring firm from discussing the case with, or in the presence of, the nonlawyer e mployee.
See Stewart v. Bee-Dee Neon & Signs, Inc., 751 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 1st Dist. 200 0).
To assist lawyers and their firms in discharging their professional obligations under the
M ‘ NALA G steps necessary to
representation of the client NALA Gelines, Comment to Guideline 1.
NFPA G EC
possible conflicts to the employer or client, as well as to the prospective employers or
NFPA G EC
GUIDELINE 8: A lawyer may include a charge for the work performed by a
paralegal in setting a charge and/or billing for legal services.
COMMENT
▪ A costs.
In Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274 (1989), the United States Supreme Court held that in
42 U.S.C. § 1988, a legal fee may includ e a charge
