Or. State. Bar. R. Regul. and Polic. 1.8
Defined Terms (see Rule 1.0):
"Confirmed in writing"
"Information relating to the representation of a client"
"Informed consent"
"Firm"
"Knowingly"
"Matter"
"Reasonable"
"Reasonably"
"Substantial"
"Writing"
Comparison to Oregon Code
This rule has no exact counterpart in the Oregon Code, although it incorporates prohibitions found in several separate disciplinary rules.
Paragraph (a) replaces DR 5-104(A) and incorporates the Model Rule prohibition against business transactions with clients even with consent except where the transaction is "fair and reasonable" to the client. It also includes an express requirement to disclose the lawyer's role and whether the lawyer is representing the client in the transaction.
Paragraph (b) is virtually identical to DR 4-101(B).
Paragraph (c) is similar to DR 5-101(B), but broader because it prohibits soliciting a gift as well as preparing the instrument. It also has a more inclusive list of "related persons."
Paragraph (d) is identical to DR 5-104(B).
Paragraph (e) incorporates ABA Model Rule 1.8(e).
Paragraph (f) replaces DR 5-108(A) and (B) and is essentially the same as it relates to accepting payment from someone other than the client. This rule is somewhat narrower than DR 5-108(B), which prohibits allowing influence from someone who "recommends, employs or pays" the lawyer.
Paragraph (g) is virtually identical to DR 5-107(A).
Paragraph (h)(1) and (2) are similar to DR 6-102(A), but do not include the "unless permitted by law" language. Paragraph (h)(3) retains DR 6-102(B), but substitutes "informed consent, in a writing signed by the client" for "full disclosure." Paragraph (h)(4) is new and was taken from Illinois Rule of Professional Conduct 1.8(h).
Paragraph (i) is essentially the same as DR 5-103(A).
Paragraph (j) retains DR 5-110, reformatted to conform to the structure of the rule.
Paragraph (k) applies the same vicarious disqualification to these personal conflicts as provided in DR 5-105(G).