Can a firm keep employing a paralegal who, at a former firm, worked on the same case the new firm now handles for the opposing side?

Plain-English summary

Paralegal P worked for Firm A, where she participated to some degree in preparing for and interviewing two plaintiff clients, then left Firm A voluntarily. About six months later, Firm B hired her. Firm B represented a defendant in the case P had worked on at Firm A, and had not allowed her to work on the file in any way. The inquiry asked whether Firm B could continue to employ P or whether her prior employment created a disqualifying conflict.

The opinion concluded that Firm B may continue to employ Paralegal P and continue in the case, but should take extreme care to ensure that P is totally screened from participation in the case.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, before the North Carolina State Bar's adoption of the 2003 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Does hiring a paralegal who worked the same case for the other side disqualify the new firm?

A: No. The opinion concluded the new firm may keep employing the paralegal and stay in the case, provided she is totally screened from the matter.

Q: What must the firm do to keep the paralegal?

A: The opinion concluded the firm must take extreme care to ensure the paralegal is totally screened from any participation in the case she previously worked on.

Background and rules framework

The opinion did not cite a numbered Rule of Professional Conduct. It resolved the question on the screening principle: a nonlawyer who switches firms does not impute her prior-side knowledge to the new firm so long as she is effectively walled off from the matter she previously worked on.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• The opinion cites no numbered rule; it rests on the screening of a migrating nonlawyer assistant from the conflicted matter.

See also

• NC Ethics Op. RPC 176: conflict of interest involving a legal assistant
• NC Ethics Op. RPC 183: role of a legal assistant in a deposition

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ncbar.gov/for-lawyers/ethics-and-governing-rules/ethics-opinions/opinions/rpc-74/

Original opinion text

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

Inquiry:

Paralegal P worked for Firm A. While working with Firm A she participated in some degree with the preparation and interviewing of two plaintiff clients. Paralegal P subsequently left Firm A of her own volition.

Firm B hired Paralegal P approximately six months after she left Firm A. Firm B represents a defendant in the case on which Paralegal P had worked while employed with Firm A. Firm B has not allowed Paralegal P to work on the file in any way.

Can Firm B continue to employ Paralegal P or does Paralegal P's previous employment with Firm A create a conflict of interest?

Opinion:

Firm B may continue to employ Paralegal P and continue in the case but should take extreme care to insure that P is totally screened from participation in the case.