Did a prior unrelated workers’ compensation matter require withdrawal from a protective-order case against the former client?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer represented A in seeking a protective order for A’s child against B. The lawyer had represented B on a workers’ compensation claim years earlier, without discussing personal matters.

Based solely on those facts, the opinion found no Rule 4-1.9 conflict requiring withdrawal. It cautioned that additional or different information could change the opinion and that a judge could still rule on a disqualification motion.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2000, before Missouri’s 2007 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Later amendments or opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it. The official Rule 4-1.9 and 4-1.10 reference notes identify July 1, 2007 amendments.

Common questions

Q: Was the opinion a categorical clearance?

A: No. It expressly rested on the information supplied and reserved different facts.

Q: Did it decide a judge’s disqualification ruling?

A: No. It expressly left that authority with the judge.

Background and rules framework

The answer expressly invoked Rule 4-1.9 and limited its conclusion to the stated facts.

Citations and references

Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Rule 4-1.9

See also

• Missouri Informal Op. 20000088: Former Shareholder Client

Source

• Landing page: https://mo-legal-ethics.org/informal-opinion/20000048/

• Rule revision reference: Missouri Informal Opinion 20030007

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

QUESTION: Attorney represents A on a protective order on behalf of A´s child against a former client, B. Attorney represented B on a workers” compensation claim several years ago and the case was settled two years ago. Attorney never discussed personal matters with B. Attorney has informed A of Attorney´s prior relationship with B and A does not have any problem with Attorney representing A against B. Does Attorney have a conflict in this matter?

ANSWER: Based solely on the information Attorney has provided, Attorney does not have a conflict of interest that requires Attorney to withdraw under Rule 4–1.9. Additional or different information could change this opinion. This opinion does not affect the ability of a judge to rule on a motion to disqualify.