Publication Date
2010
Abstract
In all types of law practice, attorneys are routinely called upon to make difficult ethical judgment calls. The ethical line-drawing that often takes place in the context of controversial or high-profile cases, however, can be uniquely challenging. Indeed, the very decision to undertake a representation of this nature is fraught with ethical and pragmatic concerns uncommon to typical legal matters. Usually, in assessing whether or not to accept representation of a client, lawyers must address such issues as competency, conflicts of interest, and fee structure. The character of these preliminary inquiries changes rather dramatically, though, when the prospective client is Saddam Hussein, for example. While the ethical rules proclaim that "a lawyer's representation of a client ... does not constitute an endorsement of the client's political, economic, social or moral views or activities," in reality, this platitude seems wishful, at best. As a practical matter, most attorneys must acknowledge and consider the potential negative effect that representing a vilified or infamous client may have on their law practice, or that of their firm.
Recommended Citation
Brown,, Lonnie T. Jr.
(2010)
"FOREWORD,"
Georgia Law Review: Vol. 44:
No.
4, Article 2.
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/glr/vol44/iss4/2