Ezel / Ethics Opinions / MOLEC

May a lawyer reveal former-client information to prove the lawyer’s own claim against that client?

Short answer Rule 4-1.6(b)(3) permits only disclosure necessary to establish the claim, no greater than needed to serve that purpose, with appropriate safeguards under Comment [12].
Bar
MOLEC
Issued
2012

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2012. 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 2012
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 asked whether information from a former representation could be disclosed without the former client’s consent to prove the lawyer’s claim in an action against that client. The opinion applies the self-claim exception in Rule 4-1.6(b)(3).

The permitted disclosure cannot be greater than necessary to establish the claim, especially when it is adverse to the former client’s interests. The opinion also requires appropriate safeguards under Rule 4-1.6 Comment [12].

In practice

For this action against the former client, the opinion permits only the information necessary for the lawyer’s claim and requires safeguards around that disclosure.

Common questions

Q: Is former-client consent always required to prove the lawyer’s own claim?

A: No. Rule 4-1.6(b)(3) permits limited disclosure to establish the lawyer’s claim.

Q: How much information may be disclosed?

A: No more than necessary for the claim, with appropriate safeguards under Comment [12].

Background and rules framework

Rule 4-1.6(b)(3) supplies the claim exception to the general confidentiality rule. Comment [12] supplies the safeguard and limitation discussed by the opinion.

Citations and references

Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Rule 4-1.6(b)(3) and Comment [12]

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

Question: Pursuant to Rule 4–1.6(b)(3), may Attorney disclose information related to Attorney’s representation of Former Client without Former Client’s consent, where disclosure is necessary to establish proof of a claim on behalf of Attorney in an action by Attorney against Former Client?

Answer: Rule 4–1.6(b)(3) permits limited disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 4–1.6 to the extent necessary to establish a claim, but only where disclosure adverse to the client’s interest is no greater than necessary to accomplish the purpose and the disclosure is made with appropriate safeguards, as described in Comment [12] to Rule 4–1.6.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2012. 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