When did former guardian ad litem work conflict with later representation?

Plain-English summary

In the first scenario, a firm member had formerly served as guardian ad litem for a disabled person and had not inquired into that person's finances. The opinion said representing a bank against the person's estate on notes was not a Rule 4-1.9(a) conflict. It added that confidential information gained during the guardian ad litem work and usable against the person would create a conflict under Rules 4-1.9(b) and 4-1.10.

In the second scenario, a lawyer had formerly represented spouse A and later served as guardian ad litem for child Z in a paternity and custody case. The opinion found a Rule 1.9 conflict in representing spouse A to modify the order entered in the case where the lawyer had served as guardian ad litem.

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: Was the bank representation always conflicting?

A: No. The opinion said it was not a Rule 4-1.9(a) conflict, but identified a conflict if the firm member had confidential information usable to the disabled person's disadvantage.

Q: Could the lawyer represent spouse A in modifying the custody order?

A: No. The opinion found a conflict under Rule 1.9.

Background and rules framework

The opinion analyzed two separate former guardian ad litem roles under the numbered rules it named, with a specific confidential-information condition in the bank matter.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Missouri Rule 4-1.9(a)
• Missouri Rule 4-1.6
• Missouri Rule 4-1.9(b)
• Missouri Rule 4-1.10
• Missouri Rule 1.9

See also

• Missouri Informal Op. 2011-05: Former guardian ad litem conflict
• Missouri Informal Op. 950238: Former guardian and custody support

Source

• Landing page: https://mo-legal-ethics.org/informal-opinion/940138/

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION 1: A member of Attorney´s firm was previously guardian ad litem for a disabled person. The guardian ad litem did not inquire about the disabled person´s financial condition. A guardianship and conservatorship was established and the guardian ad litem is no longer involved. May Attorney represent a bank against the estate of the disabled person on several notes? ANSWER: This is not a conflict under Rule 4–1.9(a). However, if the member of the firm obtained confidential information under Rule 4–1.6 in the course of serving as guardian ad litem that could be used to the disadvantage of the disabled person in the current case, Attorney would have a conflict under Rules 4–1.9(b) and 4–1.10. QUESTION 2: Attorney represented spouse A in a dissolution involving custody of children X and Y. Subsequently spouses A & B had child Z. Attorney was appointed guardian ad litem for Z in a paternity and custody action. That action was resolved and Attorney was discharged as the guardian ad litem. May Attorney now represent spouse A in an action seeking modification of the order entered in the case in which Attorney was guardian ad litem? ANSWER: Attorney has a conflict of interest under Rule 1.9.