Defining a Conflict of Interest

As noted in Florida Rules Regulating the Florida Bar 4-1.7, some ethical conflicts of interest for lawyers exist when:

• The representation of one client would be directly adverse to another.
• There’s substantial risk that representing one or more client would be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, former client, or third person by a lawyer’s personal interest.

Such conflicts can sometimes be waived if the lawyer believes they can provide competent and diligent representation to all clients, the representation isn’t barred by law, and each affected client gives informed consent.

When Interests May Conflict for Broward Car Accident Victims

When it comes to Broward car accident cases, the most obvious conflict of interest would involve representation of one driver suing another for negligence. That would likely never happen.

Similarly, it’s highly unlikely a Broward car accident lawyer could ethically represent both an injured passenger and the driver being sued for the negligence that caused the passenger’s injuries.

Where the lines become a bit more blurred is when two people in the same crash are suing a third party for negligence that caused both their injuries. For example, it might make sense for two family members injured in the same car accident to hire one lawyer if the other driver was mostly if not entirely at-fault. This is particularly true if you’re a parent of minor children.

However, it’s important to understand that if a driver and passenger suing the same driver for the same act of alleged negligence, a conflict can arise because the money will be paid from the same pot. If the injuries of one person are more severe, fairness would stand to reason that they should get a larger chunk of the money. An attorney representing both clients may find themselves with a conflict of interest because they’re advocating for the maximum payout for each.

Also bear in mind that there are few South Florida car accidents in which one driver is entirely, 100 percent at-fault for the crash. There are often several factors. If you are a passenger in a car with a driver who was just partially at-fault, you may have viable claims against both drivers. In that situation, it would be a conflict of interest for a Broward personal injury lawyer to represent both you and the person who was driving the car you were in.

Florida Bar Ethics Opinion on Car Accident Lawyer Conflicts of Interest

more

The Florida Bar Professional Ethics Committee issued an opinion in 2002 that breaks down how Florida personal injury lawyers can determine whether there’s a conflict of interest in car accident cases. The original inquiry came from an attorney asked to represent both a passenger and driver in a lawsuit for negligence and property damage against a third-party driver.

The committee first pointed to a 1993 Florida Supreme Court ruling in in The Florida Bar v. Mastrilli, in which the Court held one attorney could not simultaneously represent both driver and passenger where a passenger is pursuing a damage claim for negligence against the driver.

Similarly, in State Farm Mutual Ins. Co. v. K.A.W., the Florida Supreme Court held that a law firm that represented a driver and passengers against third party insurers and tortfeasors couldn’t later represent passengers against the driver. This was even though the driver had a new lawyer and didn’t object to the passengers’ lawsuit.

Some of the scenarios laid out by the ethics committee:

• If there are no actual or potential claims against a driver by injured passengers, one attorney can ethically represent all parties against a third party, so long as there’s sufficient insurance coverage by that third party. However, if there is not sufficient insurance coverage, the attorney needs to explain the potential conflict of interest and all plaintiffs must agree about the distribution of benefits/recovery amongst themselves.
• If there’s evidence of negligence by the driver in a one-car accident, an attorney can’t represent both the driver and passenger. The only exception might be when a passenger and driver are members of the same family and the driver is uninsured/otherwise judgment-proof. Issues of comparative fault can come into play, though, so lawyers need to be very careful when accepting these cases.
• If the driver and passengers are all injured but evidence shows that the plaintiff driver was partially at fault, there’s a conflict of interest between the driver and passengers and a single attorney can’t represent them all ethically – even with everyone’s consent.
• If the passenger and driver are all family members and the driver is underinsured, uninsured, or otherwise judgment-proof, one attorney can ethically represent all parties against the driver’s UM/UIM policy – but only if the attorney determines it’s not worthwhile or appropriate for the plaintiff to sue the driver. An independent guardian or guardian ad litem may need to be appointed to ensure the interests of any minor children involved are protected.

If there is a situation in which a personal injury lawyers concludes there is a conflict of interest after already taking on the case, they may need to withdraw their representation. This could result in unfortunate delays. It’s worth noting too that because injury lawyers are paid on a contingency fee basis (meaning they aren’t paid fees unless/until they win), they won’t be paid if they need to withdraw representation early. This is why lawyers may be particular about the cases and clients they take on. It’s better for everyone in the long-run if potential conflicts of interest are identified at the outset.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

Florida Bar Opinion 02-3

More Blog Entries:

Understanding Negligent Security at Florida Hotels – Fort Lauderdale Injury Lawyer Insight, Nov. 8, 2023, Fort Lauderdale Accident Lawyer Blog

Let’s start with the fact that with very few exceptions, seat belts are required by Florida law for all drivers and passengers in motor vehicles.

Florida’s no-fault car insurance law holds that all vehicle owners must carry personal injury protection (PIP) coverage that provides up to $10,000 in compensation for any insureds injured in a crash with that vehicle – regardless of who was at-fault in causing the crash. An injured person can step outside the state’s no-fault PIP system and pursue a claim for additional monetary damages against any at-fault parties IF their injuries meet the serious injury threshold. As set forth in F.S. 627.737, they must prove their injuries – caused by the crash for which the defendant is responsible – resulted in significant/permanent loss of a bodily function, permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability, significant/permanent scarring/disfigurement or death.

It’s worth noting that Florida is recognized as a pure comparative fault state when it comes to negligence claims. Per F.S. 768.81, that means each person/entity can only be held legally responsible to pay for the damages they caused. So for example, if one suffers $100,000 in damages and Defendant A is responsible for 40 percent and Defendant B is responsible for 60 percent, Defendant A will be ordered to pay $40,000 and Defendant B will be ordered to pay $60,000.

But what if one of the people responsible for a plaintiff’s injuries is the plaintiff themself? That is what we call contributory negligence. By way of their own negligence, they contributed to their own injuries. So if you suffered $100,000 in damages – but are 20 percent responsible for your own injuries – the most you can expect to be awarded is $80,000.

That brings us to the seat belt defense.more

What is the Seat Belt Defense?

Because the law mandates that drivers and passengers wear seat belts, and because it’s well-established that failure to do so can significantly exacerbate the injuries one sustains in a Florida car accident, failure to wear one can be grounds to assert contributory negligence, thus reducing the total amount of financial compensation to which one is entitled. This is called the seat belt defense. It’s something that the insurance company (or the defendant, if the case proceeds to litigation) will bring up to reduce the overall damages to which the plaintiff is entitled.

The validity of the seat belt defense was affirmed in the 1996 Florida Supreme Court case of Ridley v. Safety Kleen Corp. That case concerned a 1992 intersection truck accident involving a pickup truck driven by plaintiff and a service truck driven by a cleaning company employee. The injured plaintiff sued the driver/his employer/truck owner for negligence. The defense raised the issue of plaintiff’s failure to wear a seat belt as an affirmative defense. The trial court denied a defense request to instruct the jury on Florida law requiring motorists to wear seat belts. At trial, the jury found the cleaning company 100 percent liable for the crash.

Upon appeal, Florida’s 1st District Court of Appeal reversed, finding the trial court substantially erred in refusing to give the defense instruction on the state’s seat belt law. The court reasoned that because the seat belt violation constituted evidence of negligence, the jury should have been adequately informed of it. The Florida Supreme Court backed the appeals court, finding that failure to wear a seat belt makes a plaintiff comparatively negligent, and their recoverable damages should be proportionally reduced accordingly.

Subsequent rulings have stipulated that in order to prevail with the seat belt defense, defendants in Florida car accident cases must prove three things:

1. The plaintiff did not use a seat belt that was both available and operational.
2. This failure to use a seat belt was not reasonable, given the circumstances.
3. The failure of the plaintiff to use a seat belt either caused or contributed significantly to plaintiff’s injuries.

Defense attorneys would be responsible for outlining the extent to which not wearing a seat belt caused the plaintiff’s injuries or financial losses. For instance, one’s failure to wear a seat belt may not cause a crash – but it could contribute to the severity of a head injury, particularly if the car occupant was ejected from the vehicle (a scenario far more likely when someone isn’t wearing a seat belt).

Because the seat belt defense can significantly alter the value of your Fort Lauderdale injury case, it’s imperative you work with an experienced civil injury lawyer, experienced in identifying and presenting relevant evidence in your favor.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

Ridley v. Safety Kleen Corp., May 30, 1996, Florida Supreme Court

More Blog Entries:

Will PIP Cover All My Damages in a Fort Lauderdale Car Accident? May 15, 2022, Fort Lauderdale Car Accident Lawyer Blog