If the lawyer probating an estate teams up with a lawyer who earlier represented a beneficiary, can either keep working on the estate?

Plain-English summary

The committee considered, on limited facts, a situation in which one attorney who was probating an estate became associated with a second attorney who had previously represented one of the adult beneficiaries in attempting to protect that beneficiary's interest in the estate.

The committee concluded that, on those facts, both lawyers would be precluded from further representation of any parties in the proceeding, pursuant to RPC 1.6(a), 1.9, 1.10(b), and 1.15(a).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1985, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can the estate's lawyer associate with a lawyer who earlier represented a beneficiary?

A: On the facts presented, the committee said no. It concluded that both lawyers would be precluded from further representation of any parties in the proceeding.

Q: Why are both lawyers affected, not just one?

A: The committee cited the imputation rule, RPC 1.10(b), along with the confidentiality and former-client rules, so the second attorney's prior representation reached the lawyer he associated with.

Q: Which rules did the committee rely on?

A: RPC 1.6(a), 1.9, 1.10(b), and 1.15(a). In Washington's pre-2006 numbering, RPC 1.15(a) corresponded to the withdrawal rule now reflected in Model Rule 1.16.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Washington RPC 1.6(a) (confidentiality), 1.9 (duties to former clients), 1.10(b) (imputation of conflicts), and 1.15(a). In Washington's pre-2006 numbering, RPC 1.15 corresponded to the rule on declining or terminating representation, the analog of Model Rule 1.16; the other three track the Model Rules of the same number. The committee tied the result to the second attorney's prior representation of a beneficiary and the imputation of that conflict.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Model Rule 1.6 / Washington RPC 1.6(a) (confidentiality)
• Model Rule 1.9 / Washington RPC 1.9 (duties to former clients)
• Model Rule 1.10 / Washington RPC 1.10(b) (imputation of conflicts)
• Model Rule 1.16 / Washington RPC 1.15(a) (pre-2006 numbering; declining or terminating representation)

See also

• WSBA Ethics Op. 911: a contract attorney and conflicts with the former firm
• WSBA Ethics Op. 1022: imputed disqualification of a lateral lawyer with no confidences

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=34

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 923
Year Issued: 1985
RPC(s): RPC 1.6(a); 1.9; 1.10(b); 1.15(a)
Subject: Conflict of interest; association with opposing counsel in probate matter

The Committee was of the opinion that, based upon the limited facts presented by your inquiry, it appeared that where one attorney who is probating an estate had become associated with a second attorney who had previously represented one of the adult beneficiaries in attempting to protect his interest in the estate, both lawyers would be precluded from further representation of any parties in the proceeding pursuant to RPC 1.6 (a), 1.9, 1.10 (b) and 1.15 (a).