I once handled collection cases for a husband's companies. Can I now represent his wife in her divorce?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney asked whether a conflict of interest with a former client exists on these facts. A few years ago, the attorney represented several corporations owned by the client-husband for collection matters; the client-wife had recommended the attorney for those collection matters. The attorney informs the panel that the law office never represented this client at any other time, never represented any personal matters, and never acted jointly for the husband and wife. The wife has recently sought representation for a domestic matter, and the attorney questions the ethical propriety of representing the wife.

The panel advised that Rule 1.9 ("Conflict of Interest: Former Client") governs. The rule provides that a lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client. The panel concluded that the attorney may represent the wife in a domestic matter, provided the attorney does not use any information the attorney may have gained through the previous representation of the husband's corporations to the disadvantage of the former client.

In practice

Under this opinion, having represented a husband's corporations in unrelated collection matters does not, by itself, bar the attorney from later representing the wife in a domestic matter. The opinion applies Rule 1.9's bar on using information from the former representation to the former client's disadvantage as the operative limit on the new representation.

Common questions

Q: Does representing the husband's companies before disqualify me from representing the wife now?

A: Per the opinion, no on these facts; the panel concluded the attorney may represent the wife in a domestic matter subject to Rule 1.9's information-use limit.

Q: What is the condition on taking the wife's case?

A: Per the opinion, the attorney must not use any information gained through the previous representation of the husband's corporations to the disadvantage of that former client.

Q: Did it matter that the prior work was only collection matters for the corporations?

A: Per the opinion, the attorney represented that the office never represented the client otherwise, never handled personal matters, and never acted jointly for the husband and wife, and the panel resolved the inquiry under Rule 1.9 on those facts.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rhode Island Rule 1.9 (conflict of interest: former client), corresponding to Model Rule 1.9. The panel read Rule 1.9 as barring the use of information relating to a former representation to the former client's disadvantage and treated that limit as the condition on the attorney's new representation of the wife.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.9 (duties to former clients)
• RI RPC 1.9(b)

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 92-48: Suing a Former Client on an Unrelated Matter
• RI EAP Op. 92-31: Former-Client Objection Turns on the Substantial-Relationship Test

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992 (Opinion 92-59), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rule 1.9 as originally adopted. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which renumbered and amended Rule 1.9 (duties to former clients). 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 mentioned here.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2092-59.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
Opinion #92-59, Request #283
Issued July 23, 1992

An attorney seeks Panel advice as to whether a conflict of interest with a former client exists under the circumstances described. A few years ago, the attorney represented several corporations owned by the client-husband for collection matters. The client-wife recommended the attorney for the collection matters. The attorney informs the Panel that at no other time did the law office represent this client other than for the collection matters. In addition, the law office never represented any personal matters or acted jointly for the husband and wife. The wife has recently sought representation for a domestic matter with the attorney. The attorney questions the ethical propriety of representing the wife in a domestic matter.

The Panel advises the attorney that Rule 1.9 "Conflict of Interest: Former Client" governs this matter. The Rule states that:

A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:

(b) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client

The Panel believes that the attorney may represent the wife in a domestic matter provided the attorney does not use any information which the attorney may have gained through previous representation of the husband's corporations to the disadvantage of the former client.