• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« EPA to Set Limits on Rocket Fuel Chemical in Drinking Water | Main | For-Profit College Group Sues GAO Alleging Malpractice, Negligence »

February 02, 2011



isn't the more significant conflict, what advise Mr. Hardin provided to Roger Clemens in the run-up to his testimony before congress, which is the subject matter of the perjury prosecution. my recollection is that the under-oath hearing was held at the request of Hardin, who demanded on Clemens' behalf an opportunity to clear his name of the conclusions reached in the Report to Congress on steroid use.

Jack Marshall

I don't think this is a waivable conflict.

Rule 1.7 that a waiver must be accompanied by... (1) the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client;

If the judge can cite a hypothetical whereby this won't be true, how can the conflict be waived? There can be circumstances where Hardin can't meet this requirement.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad