Does a lawyer who represents the personal representative of an estate have a conflict of interest with the estate's beneficiaries?

Plain-English summary

The committee was of the opinion that a lawyer who represents the personal representative of an estate is the attorney for the personal representative. On that basis, the lawyer has no conflict of interest with the beneficiaries of the estate in continuing to represent the personal representative.

The committee noted, however, that because the personal representative has a fiduciary obligation to the beneficiaries, the lawyer has a duty to instruct the personal representative to notify the heirs of the estate to seek independent legal representation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1988, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. The rule it discusses, RPC 1.7 (conflict of interest; general rule), corresponds to Model Rule 1.7 and has since been amended. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Who is the client when a lawyer represents the personal representative of an estate?

A: Per the opinion, the personal representative. The committee was of the opinion that the lawyer who represents a personal representative is the attorney for the personal representative.

Q: Does the lawyer have a conflict of interest with the estate's beneficiaries?

A: No. Because the lawyer represents the personal representative and not the beneficiaries, the committee found no conflict of interest in continuing to represent the personal representative.

Q: Does the lawyer owe the beneficiaries anything?

A: Per the opinion, the lawyer has a duty to instruct the personal representative to notify the heirs to seek independent legal representation, because the personal representative has a fiduciary obligation to the beneficiaries.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Washington RPC 1.7 (conflict of interest; general rule), corresponding to Model Rule 1.7. The committee made the conflict question turn on the identity of the client: the lawyer represents the personal representative, so there is no adverse representation of the beneficiaries. The committee paired that conclusion with a duty owed because of the personal representative's fiduciary obligation, namely to instruct the personal representative to tell the heirs to obtain their own counsel.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Washington RPC 1.7 (conflict of interest; general rule), corresponding to Model Rule 1.7.

See also

• WSBA Ethics Op. 1221: lawyer for a testamentary trust and disclosure to residual heirs
• WSBA Ethics Op. 1216: a lawyer named testamentary trustee in a will the lawyer drafted
• WSBA Ethics Op. 1118: will drafter serving as sole trustee and guardian for the beneficiary

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=306

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1226
Year Issued: 1988
RPC(s): RPC 1.7
Subject: Conflict of interest; lawyer for personal representative has no conflict with beneficiaries of estate

The Committee was of the opinion that a lawyer who is representing a personal representative of an estate is the attorney for the personal representative, and therefore you have no conflict of interest with the beneficiaries of the estate in continuing to represent the personal representative. However, the Committee noted that since the personal representative has a fiduciary obligation to the beneficiaries, the lawyer has a duty to instruct the personal representative to notify the heirs of the estate to seek independent legal representation.