Can a lawyer who changed firms represent a client against a party that the lawyer's former firm represents, if the lawyer never worked on that matter?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer asked about a situation involving a lawyer who changed law firms. The lawyer now represents a client in a case against a party represented by the lawyer's former firm; at the former firm the lawyer did no work for that opposing party and never learned anything about the case.

The committee was of the opinion that, on the facts presented, including that the lawyer holds no secrets or confidences of the former client, the described conduct would present no violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. It added one qualification: if the former client challenges the continued representation of the adverse party, the lawyer would have the burden of demonstrating compliance with the rules.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer who moved firms oppose a client of the former firm?

A: The committee concluded that, where the lawyer did no work on the matter and holds no secrets or confidences of the former client, the conduct described would present no violation of the rules.

Q: What happens if the former client challenges the representation?

A: The committee said the lawyer would carry the burden of demonstrating compliance with the rules.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied RPC 1.9 (duties to former clients) and RPC 1.10 (imputed disqualification), corresponding to ABA Model Rules 1.9 and 1.10. The committee treated the absence of acquired confidences as decisive: because the lawyer obtained no secrets or confidences of the former client and did no work on the matter, the move did not bar the new representation, subject to the lawyer's burden to demonstrate compliance if challenged.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 1.9 (duties to former clients); Washington RPC 1.9
• ABA Model Rule 1.10 (imputation of conflicts; screening); Washington RPC 1.10

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 99-414: Lawyers Changing Firms
• WA Ethics Op. 1170: Adverse to Another Firm Lawyer's Client

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=545

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1465
Year Issued: 1992
RPC(s): RPC 1.9; 1.10
Subject: Conflict of interest; imputed disqualification; lawyer represents client adverse to former firm's client

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning situations involving a lawyer who has changed law firms. [The lawyer represents a client in a case against a party represented by his former law firm. The lawyer did no work for the opposing party at his former firm and never learned anything about the case.] The Committee is of the opinion that, based upon the facts as presented in your inquiry, including that the lawyer has no secrets or confidences of the former client, the conduct described in your inquiry would present no violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, provided that the lawyer recognizes that if his continued representation of the adverse party were challenged by the former client, the lawyer would have the burden of demonstrating that he or she was in compliance with the rules.