MI · rules
MRPC Rule 1.1
Competence
A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. A lawyer shall not:
(a) handle a legal matter which the lawyer knows or should know that the lawyer is not
competent to handle, without associating with a lawyer who is competent to handle it;
(b) handle a legal matter without preparation adequate in the circumstances; or
(c) neglect a legal matter entrusted to the lawyer.
Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 9 Updated with MSC order(s)
Legal Knowledge and Skill.
In determining whether a lawyer is able to provide competent representation in a particular
matter, relevant factors include the relative complexity and specialized nature of the matter, the
lawyer’s general experience, the lawyer’s training and experience in the field in question, the
preparation and study the lawyer is able to give the matter, and whether it is feasible to refer the
matter to, or associate or consult with, a lawyer of established competence in the field in
question. In many instances, the required proficiency is that of a general practitioner. Expertise
in a particular field of law may be required in some circumstances.
A lawyer need not necessarily have special training or prior experience to handle legal problems
of a type with which the lawyer is unfamiliar. A newly admitted lawyer can be as competent as a
practitioner with long experience. Some important legal skills, such as the analysis of precedent,
the evaluation of evidence and legal drafting, are required in all legal problems. Perhaps the
most fundamental legal skill consists of determining what kind of legal problems a situation may
involve, a skill that necessarily transcends any particular specialized knowledge. A lawyer can
provide adequate representation in a wholly novel field through necessary study. Competent
representation can also be provided through the association of a lawyer of established
competence in the field in question.
In an emergency, a lawyer may give advice or assistance in a matter in which the lawyer does
not have the skill ordinarily required where referral to or consultation or association with another
lawyer would be impractical. Even in an emergency, however, assistance should be limited to
that reasonably necessary in the circumstances, for ill-considered action under emergency
conditions can jeopardize the client’s interest.
A lawyer may offer representation where the requisite level of competence can be achieved by
reasonable preparation. This applies as well to a lawyer who is appointed as counsel for an
unrepresented person. See also Rule 6.2.
Thoroughness and Preparation.
Competent handling of a particular matter includes inquiry into and analysis of the factual and
legal elements of the problem, and use of methods and procedures meeting the standards of
competent practitioners. It also includes adequate preparation. The required attention and
preparation are determined in part by what is at stake; major litigation and complex transactions
ordinarily require more elaborate treatment than matters of lesser consequence.
Maintaining Competence.
To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should engage in continuing study and
education, including the knowledge and skills regarding existing and developing technology that
are reasonably necessary to provide competent representation for the client in a particular matter.
If a system of peer review has been established, the lawyer should consider making use of it in
appropriate circumstances.
Provenance
- Source
- www.adbmich.org
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-30
- Edition
- 2026-09-29
- Content hash
7f717345afb2ace1d17ec19b33ea45a13d3bd97c6723629e0526238dbe1348e0
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.