Final answer:
When an attorney invites a third party to rely upon their work with the client's consent, and that party reasonably does so, the third party is owed a duty of care by the attorney. This extends the attorney's responsibility beyond the direct client in alignment with principles of legal ethics and professional conduct.
Step-by-step explanation:
If an attorney, or the attorney's client with the attorney's consent, invites a third party to rely on the attorney's work, and the third party reasonably relies on that work, then the third party is also owed a duty of care by the attorney. This concept is rooted in the principles of professional responsibility and liability, extending the attorney's duty beyond the immediate client to third parties who have been foreseeably influenced by the attorney's representation or advice.
Legal precedents, such as Gideon v. Wainwright, underscore the importance of adequate legal representation, suggesting that legal professionals carry a significant burden to ensure their conduct meets certain standards of care. Furthermore, in situations reflecting a conflict of interest as indicated in the case of Glasser v. United States, the attorney's obligations are scrutinized to protect the client's Sixth Amendment rights.
The hypothetical scenario involving the promise to a friend and the duty to help a coworker, as described by the Role of Judgment, illustrates how certain duties may override others depending on the circumstances. In the context of legal representation, an attorney's primary duty may be to the client, but extenuating circumstances could shift that duty to a third party if the attorney's actions lead the third party to a reasonable reliance on the attorney's work.