Can a lawyer keep representing a plaintiff after learning a defendant once consulted with the lawyer's then-partner, if the lawyer holds no confidences of that defendant?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1991. Ask about yours and see what the current Washington Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A lawyer represented a plaintiff in a lawsuit and then learned that one of the defendants had previously consulted with a lawyer who, at the time of that consultation, was the inquiring lawyer's partner. The lawyer advised the committee that he held no confidences or secrets of this defendant.
Based on the facts as presented, the committee was of the opinion that RPC 1.10(c) would permit the lawyer to continue to represent the plaintiff in the matter.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1991, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Is a lawyer disqualified because a defendant once consulted the lawyer's former partner?
A: Not automatically. The committee said that, on the facts presented and where the lawyer had no confidences or secrets of the defendant, RPC 1.10(c) permitted continued representation of the plaintiff.
Q: What fact was decisive?
A: The committee relied on the lawyer's representation that he held no confidences or secrets of the defendant who had consulted the former partner.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied RPC 1.10(c), the provision of Washington's imputed-disqualification rule addressing when a firm is not disqualified after a lawyer's departure, corresponding to ABA Model Rule 1.10. The committee's no-disqualification conclusion rested on the absence of any confidences or secrets of the defendant in the lawyer's possession.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- ABA Model Rule 1.10 (imputation of conflicts)
- Washington RPC 1.10(c)
See also
- WA Ethics Op. 1432: Imputed Conflict From a Former Partner
- AL Ethics Op. 1994-10: DA Office Not Disqualified
Source
- Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=530
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
Advisory Opinion: 1450
Year Issued: 1991
RPC(s): RPC 1.10
Subject: Conflict of interest; imputed disqualification; opposing party consulted with lawyer's former partner
The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning your representation of a plaintiff in a lawsuit. You recently learned that one of the defendants previously consulted with a lawyer with whom, at the time of the consultation, you were in partnership. You advised the Committee that you have no confidences or secrets of this defendant. Based upon the facts as presented by you, the Committee was of the opinion that RPC 1.10(c) would permit you to continue to represent the plaintiff in this matter.
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1991. Ezel checks the current Washington 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