May different Vermont firms retain the same independent paralegal on client matters?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2002. Ask about yours and see what the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The inquiry asked whether conflicts would be imputed among law firms using the same independent paralegal. The committee applied the lawyer's supervisory duty under Vermont Rule 5.3 and discussed imputation under Rule 1.10. It said the hiring lawyer had to verify that the paralegal understood confidentiality obligations and used a system to identify conflicts.
At minimum, the hiring lawyer was to tell the paralegal the nature of the proposed matter and identify adverse or potentially adverse parties before retention. The opinion said a directly conflicting representation could prevent the paralegal from working on that matter. If the firm did not retain the paralegal, the disqualification was the paralegal's and was not imputed to the firm. Once retained, the firm had to screen the paralegal from confidential information about other clients.
The committee drew on its earlier Opinion 97-09 and ABA Informal Opinion 88-1526. It described effective screening and supervision as central to whether a nonlawyer's prior access to confidential information would disqualify a firm.
In practice
For the freelance arrangement in the opinion, the committee tied retention to a pre-retention conflicts inquiry and the paralegal's system for protecting client information. It distinguished a conflict that kept the paralegal off a matter from a conflict imputed to the entire hiring firm.
Common questions
Q: Does sharing a freelance paralegal automatically create a conflict between firms?
A: No. The opinion calls for a conflicts inquiry and safeguards for client information, with the answer depending on the proposed representation and the paralegal's prior work.
Q: What must the hiring lawyer check before retaining the paralegal?
A: The opinion says the lawyer must verify that the paralegal understands confidentiality and has a conflict-checking system, then disclose the matter's nature and adverse parties to the paralegal.
Q: If the paralegal cannot work on one matter, is the firm automatically disqualified?
A: No. The opinion says that, if the paralegal is not retained for the matter, the disqualification is personal to the paralegal and is not imputed to the firm.
Background and rules framework
The opinion quotes Vermont Rules 1.10 and 5.3, and discusses ABA Model Rule 1.10 Comment [4] on screening nonlawyers. Its cited authorities include Vermont Advisory Ethics Opinion 97-09 and ABA Informal Opinion 88-1526.
Citations and references
Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Rules 1.10 and 5.3
Other opinions cited:
- Vermont Advisory Ethics Opinion 97-09; ABA Informal Opinion 88-1526
See also
Source
- Landing page: VBA conflict of interest opinions
- Original PDF: Vermont Advisory Opinion 02-02
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2002. Ezel checks the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace