Personally, I think this problem should be treated differently: if two or more defendants are the same obligor, their rights and obligations are combined into one, and there is no redistribution of interests. For example, if the property of husband and wife is the same defendant or infringement cases, it should be handled in accordance with the general principles of the Civil Procedure Law, and the same lawyer is allowed to represent the lawsuit; If more than two defendants are joint obligors, the legal rights and obligations need to be redistributed. For example, in the case of damages between * * and the infringer as the defendant, although there is temporary consistency in the litigation against the other party, it involves the future redistribution of interests between the parties. In this case, if each defendant entrusts the same lawyer to represent the lawsuit, the court should stop it in time, and fully explain the interests to each client, so that he can cancel the entrustment or entrust it separately.