Does a past municipal-court representation of the opposing party bar a lawyer from taking a paternity case?

Plain-English summary

The lawyer represented X in a paternity action against Y and learned that the lawyer had previously represented Y in a municipal matter. The lawyer had no record of the old representation.

The opinion directs an inquiry under Rule 4-1.9(b) into whether the earlier work produced confidential information that could harm Y in the current case. It says confidentiality under Rule 4-1.6 reaches information obtained by any firm member through the earlier representation and is broader than evidentiary privilege. It does not give an unconditional yes-or-no answer on the conflict.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1997, before Missouri’s 2007 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 missing record resolve the conflict question?

A: No. The answer still calls for determining what confidential information the earlier representation produced.

Q: Does the answer limit confidentiality to privileged information?

A: No. It says Rule 4-1.6 confidentiality is broader than attorney-client privilege.

Background and rules framework

The answer applies Rule 4-1.9(b) to information from an earlier representation and describes Rule 4-1.6 confidentiality.

Citations and references

Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Rule 4-1.9(b)
• Rule 4-1.6

See also

• Missouri Informal Op. 970082: Firm’s Former Client
• Missouri Informal Op. 970100: Former Client Deed

Source

• Landing page: https://mo-legal-ethics.org/informal-opinion/970092/
• Rule revision reference: Missouri Informal Opinion 970082

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney was retained to represent X in a paternity action against Y. During the course of representation, X informed Attorney that several years before X referred Y to Attorney. Attorney represented Y on a municipal court matter, but has no record of the representation. The case was dismissed for lack of prosecution by the victim. Does prior representation of Y preclude Attorney from representing X? ANSWER: Under Rule 4–1.9(b), Attorney must determine whether Attorney obtained confidential information in the course of the municipal court representation that could be used to the detriment of Y in the current case. Confidentiality under Rule 4–1.6 is much broader than the attorney-client privilege which is a statutory evidentiary rule. Any information which came into Attorney´s possession or the possession of any member of the firm as a result of the previous representation would be included under the ambit of confidential information.