Also known as: substantially responsible · substantial responsibilities
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A close and direct involvement by a lawyer in investigative or deliberative processes concerning particular transactions or facts. The involvement must rise beyond perfunctory approval or disapproval to personal participation at an important and material level.
A close and direct involvement by a lawyer in investigative or deliberative processes concerning particular transactions or facts. The involvement must rise beyond perfunctory approval or disapproval to personal participation at an important and material level.
Sabrina Shah served as in-house counsel at Sterling Manufacturing and personally negotiated key supply contracts. After leaving the company she joined a firm that now represents a competitor suing Sterling over those same contracts. Because Shah had substantial responsibility for the underlying matters and no effective screen was implemented, the entire firm is disqualified from the representation.
A level of authority or apparent authority over governmental affairs held by a public employee. The employee must have or appear to the public to have substantial responsibility for or control over those affairs.
Sierra Santos directs a local nonprofit and occasionally testifies at city hearings on housing policy. A blog accuses her of misusing donations. Because Santos lacks substantial responsibility for governmental affairs she remains a private figure and need only prove negligence to recover compensatory damages.
A level of authority or apparent authority over governmental affairs held by a public employee. The employee must have or appear to the public to have substantial responsibility for or control over those affairs.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Substantial responsibility requires the lawyer to have become personally involved to an important and material degree in the investigative or deliberative processes. Mere approval or disapproval of a matter does not meet the standard.
The lawyer must be promptly and effectively screened from the matter. Failure to implement such a screen results in imputed disqualification of the entire firm.
No. Occasional testimony at hearings does not confer substantial responsibility for or control over governmental affairs. The individual remains a private figure who need only prove negligence in a defamation action.