Can I defend another lawyer in a disciplinary complaint brought by someone who says I recommended that lawyer to them, if I never actually represented or dealt with that person?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney asked whether the attorney may properly represent lawyer L before the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board. The complaint pending against lawyer L was filed by A, a former client of lawyer L. A had stated in the initial complaint that the inquiring attorney recommended lawyer L to A through A's employer. The inquiring attorney stated that he or she did in fact recommend L to A's employer along with another attorney, but never had any contact or discussions with A.

The panel took the position that the inquiring attorney may properly represent lawyer L before the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board. The panel based its opinion on the fact that an attorney-client relationship never existed between the inquiring attorney and A.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which renumbered and amended several provisions. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 guidance mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can I represent a lawyer in a disciplinary matter brought by someone I never represented?

A: Under this opinion, yes on these facts. The panel found the inquiring attorney could represent lawyer L because no attorney-client relationship ever existed between the inquiring attorney and the complainant.

Q: Did recommending the lawyer to the complainant's employer create a conflict?

A: The panel did not treat the recommendation as creating a bar. It rested its conclusion on the absence of any attorney-client relationship between the inquiring attorney and the complainant, noting the inquiring attorney never had contact or discussions with A.

Background and rules framework

The opinion does not apply a numbered Rule of Professional Conduct. It resolves the inquiry on a threshold fact: whether an attorney-client relationship ever existed between the inquiring attorney and the complainant. Finding none, the panel concluded the attorney could represent lawyer L before the Disciplinary Board.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• None cited. The opinion turns on the absence of an attorney-client relationship between the inquiring attorney and the complainant.

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 91-33: No Conflict When a Former Client May Testify Against a Current Client
• RI EAP Op. 91-30: When a Current Client Implicates a Former Client

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2091-34.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

Digest of Ethics Advisory Panel
Opinion #91-34, Request #155
Issued May 23, 1991

An attorney seeks Panel advice as to whether the attorney may properly represent lawyer L before the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board. The inquiring attorney indicates that the complaint pending against lawyer L was filed by A, a former client of lawyer L. A stated in his initial complaint filed with the Disciplinary Board that the inquiring attorney recommended lawyer L to A via A's employer. The inquiring attorney states that he/she did, in fact, recommend L to A's employer along with another attorney, but the inquiring attorney never had any contact or discussions with A.

The Panel takes the position that the inquiring attorney may properly represent lawyer L before the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board. The Panel bases its opinion on the fact that an attorney-client relationship never existed between the attorney and A.

Ethics Advisory Panel advice is protective in nature. There is no requirement that an attorney abide by a Panel opinion, but if he or she does, he or she is fully protected from any charge of impropriety.