伦理意见276

靠谱的滚球平台调解员必须进行冲突检查

规则1.《靠谱的足球滚球平台》第7条要求作为调解员的靠谱的滚球平台对调解的直接当事方进行冲突检查，以确保靠谱的滚球平台代表客户行使专业判断不受调解员服务的不利影响. 我们的规则不要求, 然而, 由靠谱的滚球平台/调解员对警员进行利益冲突调查, 董事, or stockholders of affiliated corporate entities when serving as mediator in a case involving corporate parties. 规则8.4, 禁止虚假陈述, further requires that a lawyer holding herself out as a neutral in a mediation must disclose to the parties the results of the required conflict check, if the lawyer or her firm represents one of the parties before her or a client adverse to one of the parties to the mediation.

适用的规则

• 规则2.2(中介)
• 规则1.7(利益冲突)
• 规则8.4(行为)

调查

初学的, 靠谱的滚球平台事务所, 哥伦比亚特区高等法院要求其靠谱的滚球平台根据法院的替代性争议解决方案(“ADR”)计划调解案件. Lawyers participating in the ADR mediation program provide their professional services to the Superior Court for a nominal fee, 由法院支付, 协助法院处理拥挤的案件. 咨询公司的靠谱的滚球平台希望参加这个项目.

如询问者所述, the attorneys participating in this program do not provide legal services or representation to either side in the dispute. 他们是由法院指定的，而不是由当事人选择的. 被指派处理案件的靠谱的滚球平台应该充当“中立的第三方”，协助“争议各方就问题交流立场，并探讨可能的解决方案或和解方案”. 调解员不对案件作出评价或发表意见, but rather prompts the parties to assess their relative interests and positions and to evaluate their own cases by the exchange of information, 解决方案的想法和选择.1996年替代性争议解决方案摘要, 哥伦比亚特区高等法院, at 5. 在这个任务中, they do not receive confidential information from the parties in the context of a lawyer-client relationship. 他们可能, 然而, 在调解过程中，接收当事人提供的保密资料, 他们同意对这些信息保密.

《靠谱的足球滚球平台》表示，其公司发现，对调解各方以及官员进行利益冲突检查是“极其繁重的”, 董事, 以及公司的股东, 以及附属实体, 配偶, 以及非法人实体的合伙人. 代替这种程序的, 询问者显然是在与公司为其客户所做的业务有关的情况下进行的, 询问者寻求进行不太广泛的利益冲突搜索，仅确定该律所目前是否代表调解的任何一方，或是否代表其利益与调解的一方不利的任何客户. The lawyer would advise the parties to the mediation that no effort has been made to determine if the firm is representing any officer, 导演, 或者是公司聚会的股东, 任何附属实体, 或任何一方的配偶或伙伴. 初学的 asks whether the firm’s attorney’s obligations under the 规则 are met by this less extensive conflict-of-interest check.

讨论

我们的规则主要针对代表客户的靠谱的滚球平台的职责, 而不是作为非客户之间的调解人或仲裁员的靠谱的滚球平台的职责.¹ 我们的规则要求, 然而, 靠谱的滚球平台应避免因“靠谱的滚球平台的责任”而引起的客户冲突 . . . 第三方. . . .规则1.7(b)(4); 看看 规则1.3. 因为在涉及客户或客户对手的案件中担任调解员很容易损害靠谱的滚球平台代表现有客户的能力, 我们认为，在担任调解员之前，需要进行某种形式的冲突检查.²

在这种情况下发生冲突的可能性是显而易见的. 例如, 为了有效地服务, mediators normally become privy to confidential information about the positions of the parties to the litigation. Should the mediator acquire confidential information through the mediation that would be helpful or harmful to her firm’s existing clients, she (as well as other members of her firm) might be obliged to use such information in order to satisfy her ethical duty of zealous representation. 看到一般 规则1.3; 看看 规则1.10:规则1.6(仅保护客户机密不被披露).

Yet the lawyer/mediator would be barred from using that information by virtue of her promise of confidentiality to the parties to the mediation. The standard Statement of Understanding applicable to the civil mediation program in the Superior Court, 由当事人和调解员在调解前签署, 规定“各方, individuals and attorneys whose signatures appear below [including the mediator] agree that all proceedings . . . 包括所作的任何陈述或拟备的文件 . . . 是否享有特权，不得在任何后续程序或文件中披露. . . .”³

鉴于对现有公司客户的利益有很大的潜在不利影响, 我们认为规则1要求有靠谱的滚球平台.进行冲突调查，以确定她或她的靠谱的滚球平台事务所是否代表调解的任何一方或其利益对调解的任何一方不利的任何一方.

We do not believe that a conflicts check of corporate constituents is normally required of lawyer/mediators under our 规则, 然而. 规则1.13 provides generally that a lawyer representing an organization represents the organization and not the 董事, 军官, 股东, 或者该组织的员工. 这是真的, 通过作为调解员的服务获得机密信息，但无法代表客户使用该信息的可能性仅影响客户组织, 而不是它的非客户成分. 在这种情况下，不需要更广泛的冲突检查.

我们的规则, 然而, 认识到客户的某些特定结构或客户组成部分的合理期望改变规则1中规定的正常组织代表原则的情况.13. 看到 对规则1的批注[13]、[14]和[15].7. 在这种情况下, 因为靠谱的滚球平台代表着更广泛的利益和客户, a broader conflict check would be ethically required to avoid compromising the interests of the lawyer’s clients.⁴

如果冲突检查是我们规则1所要求的.7 .披露调解员或其公司代表调解的任何当事方(无论这些当事方是直接涉及的组织或其官员)或对其不利, 董事, 和适当情况下的股东), that information must be disclosed to the affected client(s) unless the mediator withdraws of her own accord, 并寻求客户对根据规则1引起冲突的活动的同意.7(b)(4).

另外，规则8.4(c), 这就排除了靠谱的滚球平台从事“涉及不诚实的行为”, 欺诈, 欺骗或失实陈述,，防止靠谱的滚球平台在事实上知道自己并非中立的情况下，歪曲其中立身份，因为她代表的客户是一方当事人或对方当事人, 参与诉讼, or knows of some other circumstance (such as a personal relationship with a party to the arbitration) which could affect her neutrality. 以避免对中立地位的误读, this Rule requires disclosure of the results of the conflict check to the parties to the mediation.⁵ 但是，我们不认为规则8.第4(c)条要求每一位作为调解人的靠谱的滚球平台调查她实际上并不知道的关于靠谱的滚球平台事务所客户的信息，这些信息可能会使她的“中立性”受到质疑.”⁶

因此，我们得出结论:, 无异常情况, 靠谱的滚球平台/调解员履行其道德责任，对调解的直接当事人进行冲突检查，并向当事人披露结果.

调查没有. 93-2-5
通过:1997年11月19日

1. 规则2.2(中介)专门针对靠谱的滚球平台作为调解人的角色, 但它只适用于靠谱的滚球平台试图在两个或两个以上具有实际或潜在利益冲突的靠谱的滚球平台客户之间进行调解的情况. 参与ADR项目的靠谱的滚球平台不代表在他们面前出庭的当事人，因此不充当当事人之间的中间人.
2. We note that our 规则 prohibit conflicts of interest but do not by their express terms require 靠谱的滚球平台事务所 to have a conflicts checking system. 在任何规模的公司中，根据规则1，某些避免冲突的制度似乎是强制性的.7和1.10. Cf. 纽约州靠谱的滚球平台协会《靠谱的滚球平台职业责任守则》DR 5-105(E)(要求靠谱的滚球平台建立冲突检查系统). We assume for purposes of discussion that the firm in question is of sufficient size to require a conflict check system.
3. 担任仲裁员或调解员时, 适用的道德规范也可能要求保密, 例如《美国仲裁协会/美国靠谱的滚球平台协会商事争议仲裁道德准则》和《靠谱的足球滚球平台》. 这样的准则施加了更广泛的道德要求, 如本意见后续部分所讨论的.
4. 适用于在其他情况下服务的调解员和仲裁员, a broad conflict check might be required by other ethical rules governing mediators and arbitrators. 美国仲裁协会的商事调解规则规定, 例如, that no person shall serve as a mediator in any dispute in which that person has any financial or personal interest in the result of the mediation, 除非得到各方的书面同意, 商事调解规则5, 在接受调解人的任命之前, 未来的调解员应披露任何可能造成偏见推定的情况. Id. 美国仲裁协会和美国靠谱的滚球平台协会联合委员会颁布的《靠谱的足球滚球平台》对仲裁员也有类似的要求. 《靠谱的足球滚球平台》第二章规定:“仲裁员应披露任何可能影响公正或可能造成偏袒或偏见的利益或关系,” and further specifies that disclosure should extend to “relationships involving members of their families or their current employers, 合作伙伴或商业伙伴.” While lawyers acting as mediators and arbitrators should consult and observe all governing ethical codes, we decline to find embedded in our 职业行为准则 any blanket ethical obligations to comply with such codes.
5. 可能会出现这样的情况，即靠谱的滚球平台对其事务所的客户负有保密义务，因此无法向调解各方披露冲突检查的相关结果. The firm’s representation may in and of itself be confidential or the nature of the representation may be confidential. 在这种情况下, the lawyer/mediator would have no choice but to resolve the problem by withdrawing as mediator without further comment.
6. 我们注意到，在商事仲裁中, where the arbitrator generally acts as a private judge with substantial authority to bind to parties, 强制调查和披露的程度经常被提起诉讼. 即便如此, no clear line exists between relationships likely to affect an arbitrator’s neutrality and trivial or irrelevant relationships. 参见英联邦涂料公司. v. 大陆伤亡保险公司., 393 U.S. 145, 151-52 (1968) (distinguishing between relationships likely to affect arbitrator’s judgment from relationships that are merely “trivial); 看看 A.A.A./A.B.A. 《靠谱的滚球平台》第二章(注意到《靠谱的足球滚球平台》的条文旨在切合实际地适用，以使详细披露的负担不致过大，以致商界人士担任仲裁员不切实际, thereby depriving the parties of the services of those who might be best informed and qualified to decide particular types of cases.”)参见Al-Harbi v .. 花旗银行(Citibank), N.A., 85 F.3d 680 (D.C. 圆形的. 1996); Overseas Private Investment Corp. v. 蟒蛇有限公司., 418 F. 增刊. 107, 112 (D.D.C. 1976); but see Schmitz v. Zilveti, 20 F.3d 1043(第9章. (在仲裁员的靠谱的滚球平台事务所广泛代表参与仲裁的实体的母公司，而仲裁员只对附属实体进行冲突检查的情况下，撤销仲裁裁决, in case arising under NASD rules specifically requiring investigation of possible conflicts of interest). 我们不决定这些原则是否以及在多大程度上适用于调解, 一种与仲裁有本质区别的无约束力的程序. 我们仅仅认为靠谱的滚球平台在规则8下的义务.避免失实陈述并不要求每个调解员在每个案件中都调查和披露当事人可能声称影响其中立性的所有可能的关系.