WSBA 1986

If two people with adverse claims arising from one person's death each consulted the same firm, can the firm represent either of them?

Short answer: The committee concluded that RPC 1.9 prohibited any lawyer in the office from representing either potential claimant, because the office had an attorney-client relationship with each side and might reveal the other's confidences or secrets.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1986. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1986
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The committee understood the facts to be that the lawyer's office had been consulted by the mother of a former client about possible claims arising from her son's death. She advised the office that the son had a surviving child born out of wedlock. The office was then contacted by the mother of that surviving child about bringing a claim on behalf of the minor child. The mother of the deceased then began denying that her son had a surviving child and wanted to make a claim on her own behalf as the sole survivor.

The committee concluded that Rule 1.9 of the Rules of Professional Conduct would prohibit any lawyer in the office from representing either the mother of the deceased or the mother and minor child. It reasoned that the office had an attorney-client relationship with each of those parties, and the consequent risk was the revelation of confidences or secrets.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. RPC 1.9 on duties to former clients was later renumbered and amended. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Both adverse parties consulted the same office. Can the office represent either one?

A: No. The committee concluded that RPC 1.9 would prohibit any lawyer in the office from representing either the mother of the deceased or the mother and minor child.

Q: Why did consulting the office disqualify it from representing either side?

A: The committee pointed to the attorney-client relationship the office had with each of the parties and the consequent risk of revealing confidences or secrets.

Q: Does the disqualification extend to every lawyer in the office?

A: Yes. The committee said Rule 1.9 would prohibit any lawyer in the office from taking on either representation.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Washington RPC 1.9 as it stood in 1986, the rule on a lawyer's duties to a former client (corresponding to Model Rule 1.9). The committee applied it to an office that had consulted with two parties whose claims arising from one decedent's death became adverse, treating both as parties with whom the office had an attorney-client relationship and grounding the disqualification in the risk of revealing their confidences or secrets.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Washington RPC 1.9 (duties to former clients), corresponding to Model Rule 1.9.

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 962
Year Issued: 1986
RPC(s): RPC 1.9
Subject: (Needs language)

The Committee understood the facts to be that your office had been consulted by the mother of a former client regarding possible claims growing out of her son's death. She advised you that the son had a surviving child born out of wedlock. You were then contacted by the mother of the surviving child regarding the bringing of a claim on behalf of the minor child. The mother of the deceased is now denying that her son had a surviving child and wants to make a claim on her own behalf as the sole survivor. The Committee was of the opinion that Rule 1.9 of the Rules of Professional Conduct would prohibit any lawyer in your office from representing either the mother of the deceased or the mother and minor child because of the existence of the attorney-client relationship with each of those parties, and the consequent revelation of confidences or secrets.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1986 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.