It is academic to say that an attorney cannot represent two clients at the same time, if that representation will adversely affect either client.  The basis for the rule is simple. It relates to an attorney’s unyielding responsibility to provide the client with complete and undivided loyalty.  It has been said that a conflict of interest resulting from concurrent representation of clients with antagonists interests constitutes a breach of professional ethics and nurtures an utter disrespect for the integrity of the judicial process. 

The influence of the rule that prohibits concurrent representation where the representation will limit the lawyer’s loyalty is especially compelling in the context of a criminal prosecution because of a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel.  This month, an appellate division panel reversed the conviction of a defendant and remanded, the case back to the trial court to conduct a plenary hearing, to determine whether the defendant’s attorney, direct or indirect, representing of three of the government’s witnesses, one of whom recanted his testimony, was a violation of the attorney’s responsibility to the defendant.