Could a lawyer who recently represented both spouses in shared business and property matters represent the husband in their divorce?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1980. Ask about yours and see what the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The lawyer had recently represented a husband and wife together in a restaurant purchase, mortgage, home lease, and bar lease matter. The husband then asked the lawyer to represent him in a divorce from the wife. No children were involved, and the lawyer expected property division to be the main issue.
The committee said the earlier work created shared obligations and benefits that the divorce would divide. Some legal relationships the lawyer had helped establish might continue, while the spouses' interests in them could diverge. Citing ABA Informal Opinion 885 on adversity to a former client and possible use of confidences, the committee concluded that the lawyer should decline the husband's case against the wife.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1980 under Vermont's former Code of Professional Responsibility. The Vermont Supreme Court's rules history says the Rules of Professional Conduct replaced the Code and applied to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999; the court later made comprehensive amendments in 2009. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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.
Common questions
Q: Did the husband's expected generosity in property division change the answer?
A: No. The committee noted that expectation but still said the lawyer should decline the divorce representation.
Q: Why did the earlier joint work matter?
A: It involved continuing relationships and shared financial commitments that would have to be addressed in the divorce.
Background and rules framework
The opinion did not identify a numbered Vermont disciplinary rule. It relied on the earlier joint representation and cited ABA Informal Opinion 885 on conflict and former-client confidences.
Citations and references
Other opinion cited:
- ABA Informal Opinion 885 (1965), cited on litigation against a former client.
See also
- Vermont Ethics Op. 83-04: Two clients in related divorces
- Vermont Ethics Op. 80-08: Appeal against a former client
Source
- Landing page: VBA conflict of interest opinions
- Original PDF: Vermont Advisory Opinion 80-21
- Rules history: Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct, “These rules apply to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999.”
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1980. 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