Could a firm hire a legal assistant from a co-defendant’s lawyer without withdrawing from the shared case?

Short answer The opinion allowed the firm to continue only if the assistant was completely and effectively screened from all contact with or access to that case. It reserved court disqualification and independent complaint review.
Bar
MOLEC
Issued
1998

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1998. 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 considered hiring an assistant employed by counsel for a co-defendant in a matter the firm handled. It proposed keeping the assistant off the case and stopping case discussion with them.

The opinion required a complete, effective screen from all contact with or access to the case. If achieved, the firm did not need to withdraw. A court could still decide a disqualification motion, and a complaint would be investigated on its own facts.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998, before Missouri’s 2007 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Later amendments or opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it. The official Rule 4-1.9 and 4-1.10 reference notes identify July 1, 2007 amendments.

Common questions

Q: Was a job reassignment alone the stated condition?

A: No. The answer required a complete screen from all case contact and access.

Q: Did the opinion decide a later court motion?

A: No. It reserved the court’s disqualification authority.

Background and rules framework

The published answer required screening without citing a numbered rule.

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney’s firm has interviewed a legal assistant for a position at the firm. The legal assistant is currently working for an attorney who represents a co-defendant in a case Attorney’s firm is handling. If hired, the legal assistant would not be assigned to the case and Attorney would inform all attorneys and staff members associated with the case not to discuss any aspect with the new legal assistant. Would there be any potential conflicts or ethical violations?
ANSWER: The legal assistant must be completely screened from all contact with or access to the case involving the co-defendant. If the legal assistant is effectively screened, it will not be necessary for Attorney’s firm to withdraw. This opinion does not, in any way, affect the ability of the court to rule on a motion to disqualify. Additionally, if a complaint is received, it would be investigated to determine the facts independently.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1998. 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