When a lawyer joins a new firm, may that firm keep representing clients adverse to clients of the lawyer's old firm?

Plain-English summary

The committee addressed a firm that took on a new partner from another firm and wished to keep representing clients adverse to that other firm's clients. It concluded the continued representation is not improper, so long as the new partner did not personally represent the adverse clients while at the former firm and all clients consent to the continued representation after full disclosure, citing DR 5-105(C).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1974, under Virginia's former Code of Professional Responsibility, before the Virginia State Bar's adoption of the Rules of Professional Conduct effective January 1, 2000. The committee note states that, under Rule 1.9(b), neither the new lawyer nor the new firm is disqualified if, while at the old firm, the lawyer neither participated in the same or a substantially related matter nor acquired material confidential information. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Did the new partner's arrival disqualify the firm?

A: Under this 1974 opinion, not automatically. The firm could continue if the partner had not personally represented the adverse clients at the old firm and all clients consented after full disclosure.

Q: What changed under current Rule 1.9(b)?

A: The committee note states that the new lawyer and firm avoid disqualification if, at the old firm, the lawyer neither participated in the same or a substantially related matter nor acquired material confidential information, framing the test in terms of actual involvement and knowledge.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied the former Code's DR 5-105(C) to imputed conflicts arising from a lateral partner. The committee note maps the question onto current Virginia Rule 1.9(b), corresponding to ABA Model Rules 1.9 (duties to former clients) and 1.10 (imputation of conflicts).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• DR 5-105(C) (former Code)
• Virginia Rule 1.9(b) (former clients; migrating lawyers) (cited in the committee note)
• ABA Model Rule 1.9 (duties to former clients)
• ABA Model Rule 1.10 (imputation of conflicts of interest)

See also

• VA LEO 527: Former Partner Barred From a Related Adverse Matter
• VA LEO 303: Ex-Prosecutor's Firm Defending Old Cases

Source

• Landing page: https://vsb.org/Site/about/rules-regulations/leo-opinions.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.vsb.org/common/Uploaded%20files/LEOs/0240.pdf

Original opinion text

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

LEGAL ETHICS OPINION 240

CHANGE IN FIRM MEMBERSHIP – CONFLICT.

It is not improper for a firm to continue representing clients adverse to the clients of another firm with which the firm's new partner was previously associated, so long as the new partner did not personally represent said adverse clients while with the former firm so long as all clients consent to such continued representation after full disclosure. [See also II: DR:5-105(C).]

Committee Opinion
March 27, 1974

Legal Ethics Committee Notes. – Under Rule 1.9(b), neither the new lawyer nor the new law firm will be disqualified if while at the old firm the lawyer neither participated in the same or substantially related matter nor acquired any material confidential information.