OF THE FACTS AND CONSENT TO SUCH REPRESENTATION. GREEN V. MEE, 173 P.2D 217 (OKLA. 1946). AN AGENT WHO HAS TWO PRINCIPALS HAS THE SAME DUTIES OF FAIRNESS, DISCLOSURE AND ADVICE TO EACH PRINCIPAL AS IF HE WERE REPRESENTING HIM ALONE. REDBIRD ENGINEERINQ SALES. INC. V. BI-STATE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY. 806 S.W.2D 695 (MO.APP. 1991).
ADDITIONALLY, THE SAME PERSON MAY ACT AS AGENT FOR TWO PARTIES WHEN THE PARTICULAR INTEREST OF THE TWO PARTIES DOES NOT CONFLICT AND WHERE LOYALTY TO ONE DOES NOT NECESSARILY CONSTITUTE BREACH OF DUTY TO THE OTHER. KNUDSON V. WEEKS 394 F.SUPP. 963 (W.D OKLA. 1975.)
THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF AGENCY LAW, A LOBBYIST MAY CLEARLY REPRESENT BOTH A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY AND A COMPANY EVEN WHEN THE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY DOES BUSINESS WITH THE OTHER COMPANY, IF HE DOES NOT REPRESENT THE COMPANY IN DEALINGS WITH THAT GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY. A LOBBYIST MIGHT BE ABLE TO REPRESENT BOTH IN ANY TRANSACTION IF BOTH PRINCIPALS POSSESS FULL KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS AND CONSENT TO SUCH REPRESENTATION.
IN RESPONSE TO YOUR SECOND QUESTION, THERE IS CLEARLY NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AN AGENT MAY ASSIST IN OBTAINING A CONTRACT FOR HIS PRINCIPAL AND IF THE PRINCIPAL SO DESIRES, THE AGENT MAY PERFORM THE CONTRACT. THUS, ABSENT ANY CONTRACT PROVISION TO THE CONTRARY, A LOBBYIST MAY ASSIST IN PERFORMING A CONTRACT AS LONG AS HE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE TO HIS PRINCIPAL.
(KARIN M. KRIZ)