Many issues in legal ethics are resolved by application of state specific Rules of Professional Conduct. While every state now uses the ABA Model Rules numbering scheme, the actual wording of each rule varies widely among the states. This can yield wildly inconsistent results when an issue is resolved differently because two states address the issue with differently worded rules. In this article, we will examine the way in which these differences are supposedly reconciled, at least in part, when the rules of two states differ but the conduct in question may implicate two states' divergently worded rules.