What indicates a concurrent conflict exists between a current client and a third party?

A concurrent conflict exists when a lawyer's representation of one client may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client or to a third party. In this case, the correct choice points to a "significant risk of material limitation" due to other responsibilities.

This means that if the lawyer's ability to represent a client is hampered by obligations to a third party or by the demands of another client, a conflict arises. This is crucial in the context of professional responsibility, as it highlights the necessity for the lawyer to be vigilant in assessing how their duties towards different parties can interact and potentially disserve a client's interests. Such a conflict must be disclosed to all affected clients, and the lawyer may need to obtain informed consent to continue representation.

Other choices do not adequately capture the essence of a concurrent conflict. For instance, a minor risk affecting one client’s representation does not rise to the level of a significant risk that would implicate conflicting interests. Additionally, mere feelings of competence in managing multiple interests do not address the potential legal consequences of a concurrent conflict. Lastly, the fact that clients are not involved in the same litigation does not inherently establish a conflict; conflicts may arise even in different matters if the representation of one client adversely affects the interests