Can a lawyer who represented a guardian of an estate keep representing that guardian when a successor guardian contests the first guardian's accounts?

Plain-English summary

For several years Attorney A represented the guardian of an estate and was compensated for his services by the estate. A subsequently appointed guardian then contested the accounts of the first guardian, and the inquiry asked whether it would violate the Canons for A to represent the first guardian in that controversy.

The Committee concluded it would not violate the Canons for Attorney A to represent the first guardian. One member expressed the view that A might be in a position to use knowledge gained in his confidential capacity against the estate, in which case A should decline the representation in view of Canon 6, though the member noted that situation was not indicated by the meager statement of facts furnished. The vote was 7-1.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1955, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could the lawyer keep representing the first guardian against the successor guardian's contest?

A: Yes. The Committee held it would not violate the Canons for Attorney A to do so (7-1).

Q: Was there any condition that would change the answer?

A: One member noted that if A could use knowledge gained in his confidential capacity against the estate, he should decline under Canon 6, though the facts furnished did not indicate that situation.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 6, the conflicting-interests provision of the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar of Texas. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 1.9 (duties to former clients) and Model Rule 1.7 (conflicts of interest).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.9 (duties to former clients), as the modern analog
• MR 1.7 (conflicts of interest), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 6 (conflicting interests)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 123: Representing and Suing the Same Client
• TX Ethics Op. 158: Probate Counsel Later Suing the Executor
• TX Ethics Op. 113: Ex-Defense Lawyer Now District Attorney

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-115/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_115.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

For several years Attorney A represented the guardian of an estate and received compensation for his services from the estate. A subsequently appointed guardian has contested the accounts of the first guardian. Would it violate the Canons of Ethics for A to represent the first guardian in this controversy?

18 Baylor L. Rev. 240 (1966)

CONFLICTING INTERESTS - REPRESENTING FORMER GUARDIANS
Representing a former guardian is administering an estate does not preclude an attorney from representing such guardian in a suit by a subsequently appointed guardian for contest of accounts.

Canon 6.

The committee is of the opinion that it would not violate the Canons of Ethics for Attorney A to represent the first guardian in the described controversy. One member expressed the view that A might be in position to use knowledge gained in his confidential capacity against the estate, although this situation is not indicated by the meager statement of facts furnished to the committee, in which case A should decline to represent the first guardian in view of Canon 6. (7- 1)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 115 (1955)