Did a former adoption and dissolution matter require withdrawal from a new spouse's divorce case?

Short answer The opinion identified Rule 4-1.9 as the framework but declined to resolve the factual dispute or decide withdrawal, directing the issue to the court handling the case.

Bar

MOLEC

Issued

1994

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1994. Ask about yours and see what the current Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

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

A firm had represented H in a stepparent adoption and dissolution, then represented a different woman seeking dissolution from H. The new client had not been involved in the earlier matters. H said custody of the adopted child would arise, while the lawyer disputed that premise.

The opinion identified Rule 4-1.9 as the applicable framework. It declined to resolve the factual dispute in an informal opinion and said the issue was best resolved by the court where the case was pending. It did not decide whether the lawyer had to withdraw.

Currency note

This 1994 opinion predates Missouri's 2007 amendments to its Rules of Professional Conduct. An official reference note identifies July 1, 2007 amendments to Rules 4-1.9 and 4-1.10. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it.

Common questions

Q: Did the opinion decide whether a conflict existed?

A: No. It said the answer involved disputed facts that an informal opinion could not resolve.

Q: Which rule did it identify?

A: Missouri Rule 4-1.9.

Q: Where did it direct the unresolved issue?

A: To the court in which the case was pending.

Background and rules framework

The opinion identified former-client Rule 4-1.9 but reserved the contested facts about custody in the pending dissolution.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

Missouri Rule 4-1.9

Source

Landing page: https://mo-legal-ethics.org/informal-opinion/940086/

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney firm had represented H in a stepparent adoption and a dissolution. Attorney currently represents a woman seeking a dissolution from H. This woman was not involved in the previous proceedings. H claims that the custody of the adopted child will be an issue in the current case and therefore Attorney has a conflict of interest. Attorney does not see how this could be an issue in the current case. Is there a conflict? Must Attorney withdraw? ANSWER: The analysis which would apply would be under Rule 4–1.9. However, this situation involves a factual dispute. This office cannot resolve factual disputes in the context of an informal opinion. This issue is best resolved in the court in which the case is pending.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1994. 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