Final answer:
An attorney must adhere to ethical and legal standards before settling a legal-malpractice claim with an unrepresented client, as established by landmark cases that underline the right to an attorney and the necessity for legal counsel to be effective and informative.
Step-by-step explanation:
An attorney may not settle a legal-malpractice claim with an unrepresented current or former client unless certain ethical and legal prerequisites are met. These safeguards are in place to ensure that clients have adequate information and legal representation before agreeing to a settlement that may not fully represent their best interests. In landmark cases such as Glasser v. United States, it was established that a conflict of interest arising from a lawyer's simultaneous representation of codefendants violates the right to an attorney under the Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment.
Additionally, Strickland v. Washington set forth that for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, a criminal defendant must demonstrate that the counsel's performance was objectively unreasonable and had a material effect on the outcome. Furthermore, Padilla v. Kentucky underscored the duty of criminal defense attorneys to inform clients about potential deportation consequences following a conviction. These cases collectively emphasize the importance of the accused's right to substantive and informed legal counsel.