This paper addresses recurring ethical questions faced by college and university attorneys concerning who is the client, representation of individual and institutional defendants, and the witness-advocate rule. It also provides an overview of ethical considerations which can arise when the college/university attorney participates in the investigation of possible employee/student misconduct and in campus adjudicatory hearings. The college/university can act only through its duly authorized constituents, which the attorney usually has no difficulty identifying. Board by-laws, institutional policies and delegations of authority define responsibilities and define who speaks and acts for the institution. When the university and faculty/staff/administrators in both their official and individual capacities are named as defendants, responding on behalf of each named client appears to be the most appropriate action unless there is no difference in the facts and legal theories of defense available to each defendant. Lawyers generally cannot act as advocates at trials in which they are likely to be necessary witnesses. The paper includes two hypothetical cases that present additional questions of ethics for college/university attorneys. (Contains reference footnotes.) (MAH)