I represented Client X before a licensing board while X worked for Company Y, and now Y has been summoned before the same board. X consents. Can I represent Y?

Plain-English summary

The attorney represented Client X before a licensing board while Client X was employed by Company Y. Subsequent to the hearing on Client X, Company Y was also summoned to appear before the same licensing board. Client X consented to the attorney's representation of Company Y, and the attorney asked whether there is a conflict.

The opinion applies Rule 1.7, "Conflict of Interest: General Rule," under which a lawyer shall not represent a client directly adverse to another client unless the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not adversely affect the relationship with the other client and each client consents after consultation. On the facts presented, the opinion concludes the attorney may represent Company Y before the licensing board if the attorney reasonably believes the representation will not adversely affect Client X and each client consents after consultation.

In practice

Under this opinion, the earlier representation of Client X does not bar taking on Company Y before the same board, provided the two Rule 1.7 conditions are met: the lawyer's reasonable belief that Client X will not be adversely affected, and consent after consultation from each client. Client X's consent is noted, and the opinion routes the arrangement through Rule 1.7's belief-and-consent framework.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer represent a client's employer before the same board that heard the client's matter?

A: Yes, under conditions. The opinion concludes Rule 1.7 permits it if the lawyer reasonably believes Client X will not be adversely affected and each client consents after consultation.

Q: Is Client X's consent alone enough?

A: The opinion requires both the lawyer's reasonable belief that Client X will not be adversely affected and consent after consultation from each client.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Rhode Island Rule of Professional Conduct 1.7, "Conflict of Interest: General Rule," the analog of Model Rule 1.7. Rule 1.7(a) bars a representation directly adverse to another client unless the lawyer reasonably believes it will not adversely affect the relationship with the other client and each client consents after consultation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.7 / RI RPC 1.7 (conflict of interest: general rule)

See also

• RI EAP Opinion 93-43: may serve as special prosecutor for an agency adverse in another case under 1.7
• RI EAP Opinion 93-44: may not represent a shareholder against a current corporate client without consent under 1.7

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%2093-51.pdf

Original opinion text

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

(FINAL)
ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION #93-51, REQUEST #387
Issued July 28, 1993

The attorney represented Client X before a licensing board while the client was employed by Company Y. Company Y, subsequent to the hearing on Client X was also summoned to appear before this same licensing board. Client X consented to the attorney's representation of Company Y. The attorney asks whether there is a conflict with his/her representation of Company Y.

Rule 1.7 entitled "Conflict of Interest: General Rule" states that:

(a) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client will be directly adverse to another client, unless:

(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not adversely affect the relationship with the other client; and

(2) each client consents after consultation.

Based upon the facts presented, the attorney may represent Company Y before the licensing board if the attorney reasonably believes the representation will not adversely affect Client X and each client consents after consultation.