Are lawyers allowed to come to agreements with opposing lawyers without the client's knowledge or consent?Why do I have to sign a Corrective Warranty Deed for land I had no claim to?What restrictions/limitations can take place to apartment parking mid-lease?If a lawyer is a juror and he accurately explains a legal concept to fellow jurrors is he violating his ethical responsibilities?Are lawyers allowed to keep charging money after termination?Usage of the US President's likeness without his consentWhat crime is killing a foetus without the mother's consent?Can 3rd party websites share my personal information without my consent or knowledge?lying to lawyer illegalDoes ability to impeach an expert witness on science or scholarship go too far?
Is there any specific reason why Delta Air Lines doesn't have a callsign that doesn't conflict with the NATO Phonetic Alphabet?
Altering a employment contract prior to signing
How does Remove Curse affect Bestow Curse
My time machine can go back farther than yours -- why?
Sold item on eBay, buyer wants it to be delivered to another country, and pay by bank transfer
Decode the Dreaded Alphabet Cypher™️
Tree Diagram Backward
Is there a conflict between YAGNI and SRP?
What are the ways my non-monk character can improve their unarmed damage?
Will transcribing music improve my ability to play a song by ear?
Do the holes in Jacquard loom punched cards represent input data or program code?
why Pi is transcendental number if it will satisfy the algebraic equation as "n" tends to infinity?
Confusing Nest function behavior
Can port forwarding slow down internet for other people on the network?
How do you say "to play Devil's advocate" in German?
How to (or should one) distinguish between lowercase and uppercase alphabets orally when lecturing?
Random variable vs Statistic?
Give a grammar for a language on Σ=a,b,c that accepts all strings containing exactly one a
How to negate forall?
What is the purpose of the Dash 8’s “TOUCHED RUNWAY” warning light?
Is Communism intrinsically Authoritarian?
Why does General Grievous say “Ah yes, the negotiator?”
What is a Sexy Phrase™?
Is "那些你很冒險的夢" a common expression or just a song title?
Are lawyers allowed to come to agreements with opposing lawyers without the client's knowledge or consent?
Why do I have to sign a Corrective Warranty Deed for land I had no claim to?What restrictions/limitations can take place to apartment parking mid-lease?If a lawyer is a juror and he accurately explains a legal concept to fellow jurrors is he violating his ethical responsibilities?Are lawyers allowed to keep charging money after termination?Usage of the US President's likeness without his consentWhat crime is killing a foetus without the mother's consent?Can 3rd party websites share my personal information without my consent or knowledge?lying to lawyer illegalDoes ability to impeach an expert witness on science or scholarship go too far?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
Through his lawyer, a client asked for, and received a professional courtesy from the opposing side.
The opposing counsel had attached a condition to this professional courtesy that the client didn't know about (only the two lawyers discussed this matter). The client now finds the condition more of a "give up" than the original favor.
Is a lawyer allowed to make such a deal without consulting the client? And since it is a matter of professional courtesy as opposed to a legal right, does such a deal even have any meaning?
united-states legal-representation
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
add a comment
|
Through his lawyer, a client asked for, and received a professional courtesy from the opposing side.
The opposing counsel had attached a condition to this professional courtesy that the client didn't know about (only the two lawyers discussed this matter). The client now finds the condition more of a "give up" than the original favor.
Is a lawyer allowed to make such a deal without consulting the client? And since it is a matter of professional courtesy as opposed to a legal right, does such a deal even have any meaning?
united-states legal-representation
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
7
You might want to be more specific on what you mean by professional courtesy, the condition required by the opposing counsel, and how (or the context in which) the client learned about his lawyer's deal. Without this information, it is very hard to give a reasonably concrete answer.
– Iñaki Viggers
Sep 20 at 18:19
add a comment
|
Through his lawyer, a client asked for, and received a professional courtesy from the opposing side.
The opposing counsel had attached a condition to this professional courtesy that the client didn't know about (only the two lawyers discussed this matter). The client now finds the condition more of a "give up" than the original favor.
Is a lawyer allowed to make such a deal without consulting the client? And since it is a matter of professional courtesy as opposed to a legal right, does such a deal even have any meaning?
united-states legal-representation
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
Through his lawyer, a client asked for, and received a professional courtesy from the opposing side.
The opposing counsel had attached a condition to this professional courtesy that the client didn't know about (only the two lawyers discussed this matter). The client now finds the condition more of a "give up" than the original favor.
Is a lawyer allowed to make such a deal without consulting the client? And since it is a matter of professional courtesy as opposed to a legal right, does such a deal even have any meaning?
united-states legal-representation
united-states legal-representation
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
asked Sep 20 at 16:45
LibraLibra
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
4,20014 silver badges35 bronze badges
7
You might want to be more specific on what you mean by professional courtesy, the condition required by the opposing counsel, and how (or the context in which) the client learned about his lawyer's deal. Without this information, it is very hard to give a reasonably concrete answer.
– Iñaki Viggers
Sep 20 at 18:19
add a comment
|
7
You might want to be more specific on what you mean by professional courtesy, the condition required by the opposing counsel, and how (or the context in which) the client learned about his lawyer's deal. Without this information, it is very hard to give a reasonably concrete answer.
– Iñaki Viggers
Sep 20 at 18:19
7
7
You might want to be more specific on what you mean by professional courtesy, the condition required by the opposing counsel, and how (or the context in which) the client learned about his lawyer's deal. Without this information, it is very hard to give a reasonably concrete answer.
– Iñaki Viggers
Sep 20 at 18:19
You might want to be more specific on what you mean by professional courtesy, the condition required by the opposing counsel, and how (or the context in which) the client learned about his lawyer's deal. Without this information, it is very hard to give a reasonably concrete answer.
– Iñaki Viggers
Sep 20 at 18:19
add a comment
|
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
This depends very much on the nature of the agreement, and whether it affects the client's rights and obligations. It may also depend on which US state this is in.
If the agreement is "We will hold the negotiating meetings at your office instead of mine." the client's rights are not affected and the client probably has no veto. If the agreement is "Yes we will plead guilty to manslaughter." it isn't valid without the client's consent.
If the client is giving up any rights or making any significant concessions, then the client's consent is probably required, but I can give no better answer without an indication of the subject of the agreement.
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
1
This is a very useful answer within the parameters I gave you. You gave two examples at the polar extremes and implied that there was a middle ground, and that's what I needed to know.
– Libra
Sep 20 at 20:51
3
The usual dividing line is whether it pertains to a procedural matters in which case lawyers usually can agree (unless the procedural matter is exclusively a client decision as some are in criminal law, but very few are otherwise), or whether it resolved the merits (a client must consent to that, unless authority has been provided to do so in advance).
– ohwilleke
Sep 20 at 23:17
What about something like "We'll buy drinks after the trial, and whoever loses pays for them"?
– nick012000
Sep 21 at 8:02
1
@nick012000 : If it doesn't give any advantage or disadvantage to the clients, then why should it be a problem?
– vsz
Sep 21 at 9:26
2
@nick012000 That'd be "whoever wins pays for them". So long as there's still the incentive to win for your client, isn't that okay?
– wizzwizz4
Sep 21 at 11:24
|
show 1 more comment
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44881%2fare-lawyers-allowed-to-come-to-agreements-with-opposing-lawyers-without-the-clie%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This depends very much on the nature of the agreement, and whether it affects the client's rights and obligations. It may also depend on which US state this is in.
If the agreement is "We will hold the negotiating meetings at your office instead of mine." the client's rights are not affected and the client probably has no veto. If the agreement is "Yes we will plead guilty to manslaughter." it isn't valid without the client's consent.
If the client is giving up any rights or making any significant concessions, then the client's consent is probably required, but I can give no better answer without an indication of the subject of the agreement.
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
1
This is a very useful answer within the parameters I gave you. You gave two examples at the polar extremes and implied that there was a middle ground, and that's what I needed to know.
– Libra
Sep 20 at 20:51
3
The usual dividing line is whether it pertains to a procedural matters in which case lawyers usually can agree (unless the procedural matter is exclusively a client decision as some are in criminal law, but very few are otherwise), or whether it resolved the merits (a client must consent to that, unless authority has been provided to do so in advance).
– ohwilleke
Sep 20 at 23:17
What about something like "We'll buy drinks after the trial, and whoever loses pays for them"?
– nick012000
Sep 21 at 8:02
1
@nick012000 : If it doesn't give any advantage or disadvantage to the clients, then why should it be a problem?
– vsz
Sep 21 at 9:26
2
@nick012000 That'd be "whoever wins pays for them". So long as there's still the incentive to win for your client, isn't that okay?
– wizzwizz4
Sep 21 at 11:24
|
show 1 more comment
This depends very much on the nature of the agreement, and whether it affects the client's rights and obligations. It may also depend on which US state this is in.
If the agreement is "We will hold the negotiating meetings at your office instead of mine." the client's rights are not affected and the client probably has no veto. If the agreement is "Yes we will plead guilty to manslaughter." it isn't valid without the client's consent.
If the client is giving up any rights or making any significant concessions, then the client's consent is probably required, but I can give no better answer without an indication of the subject of the agreement.
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
1
This is a very useful answer within the parameters I gave you. You gave two examples at the polar extremes and implied that there was a middle ground, and that's what I needed to know.
– Libra
Sep 20 at 20:51
3
The usual dividing line is whether it pertains to a procedural matters in which case lawyers usually can agree (unless the procedural matter is exclusively a client decision as some are in criminal law, but very few are otherwise), or whether it resolved the merits (a client must consent to that, unless authority has been provided to do so in advance).
– ohwilleke
Sep 20 at 23:17
What about something like "We'll buy drinks after the trial, and whoever loses pays for them"?
– nick012000
Sep 21 at 8:02
1
@nick012000 : If it doesn't give any advantage or disadvantage to the clients, then why should it be a problem?
– vsz
Sep 21 at 9:26
2
@nick012000 That'd be "whoever wins pays for them". So long as there's still the incentive to win for your client, isn't that okay?
– wizzwizz4
Sep 21 at 11:24
|
show 1 more comment
This depends very much on the nature of the agreement, and whether it affects the client's rights and obligations. It may also depend on which US state this is in.
If the agreement is "We will hold the negotiating meetings at your office instead of mine." the client's rights are not affected and the client probably has no veto. If the agreement is "Yes we will plead guilty to manslaughter." it isn't valid without the client's consent.
If the client is giving up any rights or making any significant concessions, then the client's consent is probably required, but I can give no better answer without an indication of the subject of the agreement.
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
This depends very much on the nature of the agreement, and whether it affects the client's rights and obligations. It may also depend on which US state this is in.
If the agreement is "We will hold the negotiating meetings at your office instead of mine." the client's rights are not affected and the client probably has no veto. If the agreement is "Yes we will plead guilty to manslaughter." it isn't valid without the client's consent.
If the client is giving up any rights or making any significant concessions, then the client's consent is probably required, but I can give no better answer without an indication of the subject of the agreement.
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
answered Sep 20 at 17:21
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
28.3k2 gold badges47 silver badges99 bronze badges
1
This is a very useful answer within the parameters I gave you. You gave two examples at the polar extremes and implied that there was a middle ground, and that's what I needed to know.
– Libra
Sep 20 at 20:51
3
The usual dividing line is whether it pertains to a procedural matters in which case lawyers usually can agree (unless the procedural matter is exclusively a client decision as some are in criminal law, but very few are otherwise), or whether it resolved the merits (a client must consent to that, unless authority has been provided to do so in advance).
– ohwilleke
Sep 20 at 23:17
What about something like "We'll buy drinks after the trial, and whoever loses pays for them"?
– nick012000
Sep 21 at 8:02
1
@nick012000 : If it doesn't give any advantage or disadvantage to the clients, then why should it be a problem?
– vsz
Sep 21 at 9:26
2
@nick012000 That'd be "whoever wins pays for them". So long as there's still the incentive to win for your client, isn't that okay?
– wizzwizz4
Sep 21 at 11:24
|
show 1 more comment
1
This is a very useful answer within the parameters I gave you. You gave two examples at the polar extremes and implied that there was a middle ground, and that's what I needed to know.
– Libra
Sep 20 at 20:51
3
The usual dividing line is whether it pertains to a procedural matters in which case lawyers usually can agree (unless the procedural matter is exclusively a client decision as some are in criminal law, but very few are otherwise), or whether it resolved the merits (a client must consent to that, unless authority has been provided to do so in advance).
– ohwilleke
Sep 20 at 23:17
What about something like "We'll buy drinks after the trial, and whoever loses pays for them"?
– nick012000
Sep 21 at 8:02
1
@nick012000 : If it doesn't give any advantage or disadvantage to the clients, then why should it be a problem?
– vsz
Sep 21 at 9:26
2
@nick012000 That'd be "whoever wins pays for them". So long as there's still the incentive to win for your client, isn't that okay?
– wizzwizz4
Sep 21 at 11:24
1
1
This is a very useful answer within the parameters I gave you. You gave two examples at the polar extremes and implied that there was a middle ground, and that's what I needed to know.
– Libra
Sep 20 at 20:51
This is a very useful answer within the parameters I gave you. You gave two examples at the polar extremes and implied that there was a middle ground, and that's what I needed to know.
– Libra
Sep 20 at 20:51
3
3
The usual dividing line is whether it pertains to a procedural matters in which case lawyers usually can agree (unless the procedural matter is exclusively a client decision as some are in criminal law, but very few are otherwise), or whether it resolved the merits (a client must consent to that, unless authority has been provided to do so in advance).
– ohwilleke
Sep 20 at 23:17
The usual dividing line is whether it pertains to a procedural matters in which case lawyers usually can agree (unless the procedural matter is exclusively a client decision as some are in criminal law, but very few are otherwise), or whether it resolved the merits (a client must consent to that, unless authority has been provided to do so in advance).
– ohwilleke
Sep 20 at 23:17
What about something like "We'll buy drinks after the trial, and whoever loses pays for them"?
– nick012000
Sep 21 at 8:02
What about something like "We'll buy drinks after the trial, and whoever loses pays for them"?
– nick012000
Sep 21 at 8:02
1
1
@nick012000 : If it doesn't give any advantage or disadvantage to the clients, then why should it be a problem?
– vsz
Sep 21 at 9:26
@nick012000 : If it doesn't give any advantage or disadvantage to the clients, then why should it be a problem?
– vsz
Sep 21 at 9:26
2
2
@nick012000 That'd be "whoever wins pays for them". So long as there's still the incentive to win for your client, isn't that okay?
– wizzwizz4
Sep 21 at 11:24
@nick012000 That'd be "whoever wins pays for them". So long as there's still the incentive to win for your client, isn't that okay?
– wizzwizz4
Sep 21 at 11:24
|
show 1 more comment
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44881%2fare-lawyers-allowed-to-come-to-agreements-with-opposing-lawyers-without-the-clie%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
7
You might want to be more specific on what you mean by professional courtesy, the condition required by the opposing counsel, and how (or the context in which) the client learned about his lawyer's deal. Without this information, it is very hard to give a reasonably concrete answer.
– Iñaki Viggers
Sep 20 at 18:19