It might seem unusual for a book on legal ethics to begin with the complicated issue of conflicts of interest. However, if an attorney waits until after the initial client interview to determine whether a conflict exists or is likely to develop during representation, the attorney might prejudice the client by having to conflict off the case at some later time. Conflicting off the case will not only lengthen the litigation time-line by requiring another attorney to prepare the case but also will increase the client's emotional trauma inherent in contested litigation. Therefore, before an attorney considers the detailed facts inherent in any case, engages in an intake or initial client interview, and even reviews all the available evidence, counsel should consider actual and potential conflicts of interest. Furthermore, it is essential for counsel to continually assess conflicts questions until the completion of the client's representation.

CHILDREN'S ATTORNEYS: POTENTIAL DIVIDED LOYALTIES

Because of the tremendous expense of representing parties in child dependency cases, one money-saving shortcut is to use a system in which a single legal office represents multiple parties. For instance, a government attorney office, such as a county counsel, district attorney, or public defender office, might represent parents, children, and/or the Department of Child and Family Services in different cases. However, because of the possibility of conflicts of interest, disclosure of confidential data, and breaches of loyalty, such multiparty representation usually violates the canon of ethics.