revises Model Rule 5.1 to delete divisions (a) and (b) and insert references to

“government agency” in division (c)(2) and the corresponding comments. Some of the principles contained in Model Rule 5.1(a) and (b) are retained as aspirational provisions of the comments. The addition of “government agency” is consistent with deletion of the reference to “government” in Rule 1.0, Comment [3] and the addition of Rule 1.0, Comment [4A]. One sentence from Comment [3] is deleted in light of Ohio’s mandatory continuing legal education requirements. 140 RULE 5.2: RESPONSIBILITIES OF A SUBORDINATE LAWYER (a) A lawyer is bound by the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct notwithstanding that the lawyer acted at the direction of another person. (b) A subordinate lawyer does not violate the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct if that lawyer acts in accordance with a supervisory lawyer’s reasonable resolution of a question of professional duty. Comment [1] Although a lawyer is not relieved of responsibility for a violation by the fact that the lawyer acted at the direction of a supervisor, that fact may be relevant in determining whether a lawyer had the knowledge required to render conduct a violation of the rules. For example, if a subordinate filed a frivolous pleading at the direction of a supervisor, the subordinate would not be guilty of a professional violation unless the subordinate knew of the document’s frivolous character. [2] When lawyers in a supervisor-subordinate relationship encounter a matter involving professional judgment as to ethical duty, the supervisor may assume responsibility for making the judgment. Otherwise a consistent course of action or position could not be taken. If the question can reasonably be answered only one way, the duty of both lawyers is clear and they are equally responsible for fulfilling it. However, if the resolution is unclear, someone has to decide upon the course of action. That authority ordinarily reposes in the supervisor, and a subordinate may be guided accordingly. For example, if a question arises whether the interests of two clients conflict under Rule 1.7, the supervisor’s reasonable resolution of the question should protect the subordinate professionally if the resolution is subsequently challenged. Comparison to former Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility There is no Disciplinary Rule comparable to Rule 5.2. Comparison to ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct