My partner drafted a will for a woman 13 years ago. Can I keep representing my client in a lawsuit against that woman now, or is she a former client I can't oppose?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney represented a wife in a divorce action. After the divorce commenced, the wife's mother-in-law filed a separate action against the wife. The attorney then learned that his law partner had prepared a will for the mother-in-law thirteen years earlier. The attorney asked whether he could continue representing the wife in the suit against the mother-in-law.

The panel analyzed the question under Rule 1.9 (Conflict of Interest: Former Client) and Rule 1.10 (Imputed Disqualification). Rule 1.9 bars a lawyer who formerly represented a client from representing another person in the same or a substantially related matter that is materially adverse to the former client without consent, and from using information from the representation to the former client's disadvantage. Rule 1.10 imputes one firm member's conflict to all firm members, so the partner's prior work on the will was relevant to the inquiring attorney's position.

The panel explained that a conflict with a former client requires the current matter to be the same as or substantially related to the former matter, absent consent. Here, preparing the will was not the same as or substantially related to the mother-in-law's action against the wife. The panel concluded that the attorney may continue to represent the wife against the mother-in-law without violating Rule 1.9, provided he does not use information relating to the prior representation to the disadvantage of the former client.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 1.9 and 1.10 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 several provisions. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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.

Common questions

Q: Can a firm oppose a former client the firm once did unrelated work for?

A: Under this opinion, yes. The panel held that Rule 1.9 bars opposing a former client only in the same or a substantially related matter, and preparing a will years earlier was not substantially related to the later action.

Q: Does one lawyer's prior work disqualify the whole firm?

A: Rule 1.10 imputes a conflict across the firm, so the partner's prior will work was attributed to the inquiring attorney; but because the matters were not substantially related, there was no conflict to impute.

Q: What limit did the panel place on continuing the representation?

A: The panel conditioned the continued representation on the attorney not using information relating to the prior representation to the disadvantage of the former client.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rule 1.9 (Conflict of Interest: Former Client) and Rule 1.10 (Imputed Disqualification), corresponding to Model Rules 1.9 and 1.10. Rule 1.9 turns on whether the current matter is the same as or substantially related to the former representation and bars misuse of the former client's information; Rule 1.10 attributes one firm lawyer's disqualification to the others. The panel resolved the inquiry on the "substantially related" threshold, finding it unmet.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.9 (duties to former clients)
• MR 1.10 (imputation of conflicts of interest)
• RI RPC 1.9, 1.10

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 95-34: No Conflict Where a Former Divorce Client May Testify for the Prosecution
• RI EAP Op. 95-20: Representing a Husband Against a Formerly Represented Wife
• RI EAP Op. 2019-02: No Conflict Representing a Buyer Against an Unrelated Former Corporate Client

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%2095-42.pdf

Original opinion text

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

Final

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION # 95-42, REQUEST # 609
ISSUED - SEPTEMBER 14, 1995

The inquiring attorney represented a wife in a divorce action. After the commencement of the divorce, the wife's mother-in-law filed a separate action against the wife and asked the inquiring attorney to represent her in that matter. The inquiring attorney then learned that his/her law partner had prepared a will for the mother-in-law thirteen years ago.

The inquiring attorney asks whether he/she may continue representing the wife in the suit against the mother-in-law.

Rule 1.9 entitled "Conflict of Interest: Former Client" is applicable to this inquiry. That Rule states: A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:

(a) represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client consents after consultation; or

(b) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as Rule 1.6 or Rule 3.3 would permit or require with respect to a client or when the information has become generally known.

Rule 1.10 entitled "Imputed Disqualification" disqualifies all firm members from representing a client if one firm member has a conflict of interest with respect to that client.

In order to have a conflict of interest with a former client, the matters of the current client should be the "same or substantially related" to the former client's matter unless the former client consents.

In this case, the preparations of a will is not the same or substantially related to the mother-in-law's action against the wife. Under Rule 1.9 the inquiring attorney may continue to represent the wife against the mother-in-law without violating Rule 1.9 provided that he/she does not use information relating to the prior representation to the disadvantage of the former client.