I once handled a divorce for someone, with no contact since. Now that former client is suing my current client, a furniture company, over defective goods. Does Rule 1.9 let me defend the furniture company?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney had formerly represented a client in a divorce action and had no other contact with her since. The attorney's current client, a furniture company, sought the attorney's services to defend a lawsuit for defective goods brought by that former client, who was represented by counsel. The attorney asked whether he or she could represent the current client in the lawsuit.

The Panel answered yes. It identified Rule 1.9 ("Conflict of Interest: Former Client") as the appropriate rule whenever an attorney questions representation of one client against a former client, and set out the rule's text. The Panel explained that an attorney may represent a current client against a former client when the matters are not the same or substantially related, but may not use information relating to the former representation to that client's disadvantage. Here, the former client's case was a domestic relations matter, which the Panel found is not the same or substantially related to the current client's case for defective goods.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996 (Opinion 96-12, issued June 13, 1996), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rule 1.9 as it stood at the time. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which amended these rules. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can I defend a client being sued by someone I once represented in a divorce?

A: On these facts the Panel said yes, because a domestic relations matter is not the same or substantially related to a defective-goods lawsuit under Rule 1.9.

Q: Does it matter that the former client is now represented by her own counsel?

A: The Panel noted she was represented but grounded its answer in the lack of a substantial relationship between the divorce and the goods dispute, not on her current representation.

Q: Any limits on taking the defense?

A: Yes. The Panel cautioned that the attorney may not use information relating to the former representation to the former client's disadvantage.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Rhode Island Rule of Professional Conduct 1.9 (conflict of interest: former client), the analog of Model Rule 1.9. The Panel applied the substantial-relationship test, finding a domestic relations representation and a defective-goods suit factually and legally distinct, so no former-client bar applied absent misuse of prior confidences.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.9 / RI RPC 1.9 (conflict of interest: former client; substantial-relationship test)

See also

• RI EAP Opinion 96-04: a lawyer may oppose a former divorce client in an unrelated injury case under Rule 1.9
• RI EAP Opinion 96-09: a lawyer may oppose a former client in unrelated matters after a lateral move under Rule 1.9

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%2096-12.pdf

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION 96-12, - REQUEST # 663
Issued - June 13, 1996

FACTS:

The inquiring attorney formerly represented a client in a divorce action and has had no other contact with her. The inquiring attorney's current client, a furniture company, seeks his/her legal services to defend a law suit, for defective goods, brought by the former client. The former client is represented by counsel.

ISSUES PRESENTED:

May the inquiring attorney represent the current client in the law suit?

OPINION:

Yes, the domestic relations matter (with the former client) does not appear to be substantially related to a lawsuit for defective goods (with the current client.)

REASONING:

Whenever an attorney has a question regarding the representation of one client against a former client, Rule 1.9 entitled "Conflict of Interest: Former Client" is the appropriate Rule. That Rule states:

A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:

(a) represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client consents after consultation; or

(b) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as Rule 1.6 or Rule 3.3 would permit or require with respect to a client or when the information has become generally known.

The inquiring attorney may represent a current client in a matter against a former client when the matters are not the same or substantially related. However, the inquiring attorney may not use information relating to the representation of the former client to that client's disadvantage. In the present situation, the former client's case was a domestic relations matter which is not "the same or substantially related" to the current client's case with respect to defective goods.