Final answer:
A subordinate is not responsible for misconduct if they were following reasonable orders that seemed lawful and did not breach any ethical rules or laws. They may not be held liable if they acted under the assumption that they were carrying out legitimate job duties as instructed by a supervising attorney.
Step-by-step explanation:
Subordinate attorneys or other staff members are generally expected to follow ethical rules and could be held responsible for their own misconduct. However, a subordinate is not responsible for the misconduct of a supervising attorney if they were following reasonable orders that appeared to be lawful and did not result in a violation of ethical rules or laws.
In the context of the question, a subordinate (of supervising attorney) may not be responsible for instances of harassment if they were not involved or did not contribute to the harassment. This could be the case if the subordinate was not aware of the harassment, did not participate in it, and took appropriate action upon becoming aware of it. However, it is important to note that the specific circumstances may determine the level of responsibility and liability of the subordinate.
In scenarios involving workplace harassment, the harasser can be the victim's supervisor, a supervisor in another area, a coworker, or even someone not directly affiliated with the employer, like a client or customer. If a subordinate is directed to take actions that later become subject to an investigation or legal scrutiny, they may not be held liable if they acted under the reasonable assumption that they were fulfilling legitimate job duties as instructed.