In a child-support enforcement case, what does a corporation counsel who represents only the state have to tell the parents and child?

Plain-English summary

Opinion E-92-5 (1992) addressed the professional responsibilities of a corporation counsel toward parties other than the state in child-support enforcement actions, given that Wis. Stat. § 767.075(2)(a) disclaims any attorney-client relationship between such an attorney and anyone except the state. The committee quoted the statute, under which an attorney acting under the cited statutes, including a district attorney or corporation counsel, represents only the state and provides child-support services that do not create an attorney-client relationship with any other party (with an exception for an attorney acting as guardian ad litem to establish paternity).

The committee concluded that corporation counsel, district attorneys, and other attorneys appointed in these actions must clearly disclose to any person for whom child-support services are provided four things: that the attorney represents only the interests of the State of Wisconsin; that the interests of the state, the child for whom support is sought, and the child's parents are not necessarily the same and may conflict; that anyone wanting legal advice or representation on the enforcement action or related matters must obtain it from an independent attorney; and that any information the child or parent discloses, whether or not it relates to the support action, is not confidential and may be used by the state or others in any other matter. The committee cited SCR 20:1.6 (confidentiality) and SCR 20:4.3 (dealing with an unrepresented person) for these points.

The committee further recommended that these attorneys inform such persons of any significant divergence of interest between that person and the state and how it would affect the representation. Although the absence of an attorney-client relationship would not require those disclosures, the committee reasoned they would enhance public confidence in the legal system and better ensure compliance with SCR 20:4.3's requirement to make reasonable efforts not to mislead an unrepresented person about the lawyer's role.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992, before Wisconsin's July 1, 2007 adoption of the revised Rules of Professional Conduct (the state's Ethics 2000 update). The rules it relies on (SCR 20:1.6 and 20:4.3) and the cited statutes governing child-support enforcement have been revised since. 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: Who is the corporation counsel's client in a child-support enforcement action?

A: Only the state. The committee concluded that under Wis. Stat. § 767.075(2)(a) the attorney represents only the State of Wisconsin and forms no attorney-client relationship with the parents or child.

Q: What must the attorney tell the parents and child?

A: The committee concluded the attorney must disclose that the attorney represents only the state, that interests may conflict, that the person must get independent counsel for advice, and that what the person discloses is not confidential and may be used elsewhere.

Q: Is information a parent shares with the corporation counsel confidential?

A: No. The committee concluded the attorney must make clear that information disclosed by the child or parent, whether or not related to the support action, is not confidential and may be used by the state or others.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets the corporation counsel's duties under Wis. Stat. § 767.075(2) in light of SCR 20:1.6 / Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality) and SCR 20:4.3 / Model Rule 4.3 (dealing with an unrepresented person). Because the statute negates an attorney-client relationship with the parents and child, the committee focused on the lawyer's duty not to mislead those unrepresented persons about the lawyer's role.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Wis. SCR 20:1.6 / Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information)
• Wis. SCR 20:4.3 / Model Rule 4.3 (dealing with an unrepresented person)

Statutes:

• Wis. Stat. § 767.075(2) (representation in child-support enforcement actions)
• Wis. Stat. § 46.25; Wis. Stat. § 59.07(97) (child-support enforcement programs)

See also

• WI Ethics Op. E-95-2: In-House Counsel Providing Services to Third Parties
• ABA Formal Op. 97-405: Conflicts in Representing Government Entities
• WI Ethics Op. E-95-1: Communicating With a Represented Government Agency

Source

• Landing page: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/pages/formal-opinions.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/E-92-5.pdf