Ezel / Ethics Opinions / MOLEC

May a lawyer who defended both spouses in a collection case later represent the husband against the former wife over that debt?

Short answer The opinion says the prior collection matter is substantially related under Rule 4-1.9(a), so a conflict would likely exist in the proposed contempt representation.
Bar
MOLEC
Issued
2006

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2006. Ask about yours and see what the current Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2006
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
How much weight this carries: Under Missouri Supreme Court Rule 5.30, formal opinions are binding; informal opinions are advisory. Source.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The lawyer had defended a husband and wife together in a collection matter. After divorce, the husband sought representation in the former wife’s contempt motion over failure to pay a creditor from that earlier matter.

The opinion calls the collection case substantially related to the proposed contempt representation under Rule 4-1.9(a). It concludes that a conflict of interest would likely exist if the lawyer represented the husband.

In practice

The opinion applies the substantial-relationship rule to the prior joint defense and the proposed action between the former spouses. It describes the resulting conflict as likely.

Common questions

Q: Are the collection and contempt matters substantially related?

A: Yes. The opinion expressly treats the earlier collection representation as substantially related under Rule 4-1.9(a).

Q: Does the opinion approve representing the husband?

A: No. It says a conflict would likely exist if the lawyer took the contempt matter.

Q: Whom did the lawyer previously represent?

A: The lawyer defended both husband and wife in the collection case.

Background and rules framework

Rule 4-1.9(a) addresses substantially related matters involving a former client. The opinion applies it to the lawyer’s earlier joint defense and the proposed later representation.

Citations and references

Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Rule 4-1.9

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney defended husband and wife in a collection matter. Husband and wife are now divorced. Husband requested attorney’s representation in a Motion for Contempt file by ex-wife regarding failure to pay one of the creditors from the collection matter. Ex-wife claims that there would be conflict because attorney defended them in the collections matter. May Attorney represent husband?

ANSWER: Prior representation in the collection matter would be considered a substantially related matter under Rule 4–1.9(a). Therefore, a conflict of interest would likely exist if Attorney represents the husband in the contempt matter.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2006. Ezel checks the current Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace