Can a lawyer advise a client to contact other lawyers for representation on a pretextual basis just to conflict them out of representing the adversary?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2006. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Opinion 703 addresses a practice in which a client is advised to contact other lawyers for representation essentially on a pretextual basis, so as to disqualify those lawyers from later representing an adversary. The example the inquirer raised involved matrimonial cases, where a lawyer or firm engaged by one party may be advising that party to make such contacts to conflict out potential opposing counsel.
The Committee concludes that any such advice by a lawyer plainly constitutes prohibited conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice under RPC 8.4(d), because it impedes a litigant's effective access to counsel of choice. The opinion states that the practice should cease immediately.
In practice
The opinion holds that, under RPC 8.4(d) as it stood at the time, a lawyer who advises a client to make pretextual contacts with other lawyers in order to disqualify them from representing the adversary engages in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, because the maneuver impedes the opposing party's access to counsel of choice. Per the opinion, the violation lies in the advice itself, and the practice should cease immediately. Because this opinion predates the most recent five years, verify the current Rules of Professional Conduct before relying on the specific rule text it describes.
Common questions
Q: Is it ethical to "conflict out" the other side by having my client interview their likely lawyers?
A: No. The opinion concludes that advising a client to contact lawyers on a pretextual basis to disqualify potential adversary counsel is conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice under RPC 8.4(d).
Q: Which rule does this practice violate?
A: RPC 8.4(d). The opinion states that the advice impedes a litigant's effective access to counsel of choice and should cease immediately.
Q: Does the opinion limit itself to matrimonial cases?
A: The inquirer's example involved matrimonial matters, but the opinion's holding is stated as a general rule that such advice plainly constitutes prohibited conduct under RPC 8.4(d).
Background and rules framework
The opinion interprets RPC 8.4(d), the New Jersey analog to Model Rule 8.4(d), which makes it professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Committee applies that rule to the tactic of advising a client to manufacture pretextual lawyer contacts so that opposing parties cannot retain those lawyers.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- MR 8.4(d) / NJ RPC 8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice)
See also
- ABA Formal Op. 510: Avoiding Imputation of a Prospective-Client Conflict
- ABA Formal Op. 90-358: Information From a Prospective Client
- CA Formal Op. 1984-084: Adversity to a Former Consultee
Source
- Full text (Justia mirror): https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/advisory-committee-on-professional-ethics/2006/acp703-1.html
- Issuing authority: New Jersey Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, via the NJ Courts Supreme Court Committees page
Original opinion text
Reproduced from a full-text mirror of the official opinion for research purposes. The linked official source controls.
184 N.J.L.J. 315
April 24, 2006
15 N.J.L. 899
April 24, 2006
Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics
Appointed by the Supreme Court of New Jersey
Opinion 703
Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics
Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice: Contacting Lawyers for Representation on Pretextual Basis to Disqualify Potential Adversary Counsel
An inquirer raised concern about a practice under which a client was advised to contact other lawyers for representation essentially on a pretextual basis, in order to disqualify those lawyers from representation of an adversary. The example given involved matrimonial cases. It appears that a lawyer or firm engaged to represent the party may be advising clients to take this step in order to disqualify potential adversary counsel.
The inquirer asks whether such a practice by a firm would run afoul of the Rules of Professional Conduct. It is the opinion of the Committee that any such advice by a lawyer to a client plainly would constitute prohibited conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice under RPC 8.4(d), in that it would impede a litigant's effective access to counsel of choice, and should cease immediately.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2006 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.