I represent the wife in an uncontested divorce, and the pro se husband keeps asking me for help. What can I do for him, if anything, without a conflict under Rule 1.7?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney represented a woman in an uncontested, limited-asset divorce. The couple had reached an amicable agreement on child support and the marital house, and the pro se husband contacted the attorney to firm up that agreement. The attorney instructed the husband on court procedure, such as filing answers and counterclaims, and when the husband asked for further assistance, the attorney told him he or she could not offer legal advice to both parties to a divorce. The attorney asked whether he or she could (1) provide a sample answer and counterclaim prepared by the attorney, (2) provide a DR-6A financial statement form from the Family Court clerk, (3) draft a property settlement agreement reflecting the parties' consensus, (4) negotiate the portion of the wife's legal fees the husband would pay, and (5) assist the husband in court with his testimony.

The Panel concluded the attorney may provide the husband with the DR-6A form and may draft a property settlement agreement on behalf of the client, but may not otherwise assist the husband. It set out Rule 1.7(a) ("Conflict of Interest: General Rule"), which bars representing a client whose representation will be directly adverse to another client absent reasonable belief the representation will not be adversely affected and each client's consent. The Panel found the wife's interests directly adverse to the husband's, that the attorney could not reasonably believe representing the husband would not adversely affect the relationship with the wife, and that the attorney may not represent both parties and must so notify the husband.

The Panel explained that the attorney may provide the DR-6A form (also available from the Family Court clerk) and may prepare a property settlement so long as no legal advice is rendered to the husband, but cautioned against "assisting" the husband with other aspects of the divorce because such assistance might constitute legal representation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996 (Opinion 96-22, issued September 12, 1996), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rule 1.7 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 reorganized Rule 1.7's conflict standard. 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 or form mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can I represent both spouses in an amicable, uncontested divorce?

A: The Panel said no. It found the spouses' interests directly adverse under Rule 1.7 and held the attorney could not reasonably believe representing the husband would not adversely affect the relationship with the wife.

Q: What may the wife's lawyer still do for the pro se husband?

A: The Panel allowed two things: providing the DR-6A financial statement form (also available from the clerk) and drafting a property settlement agreement on behalf of the client, so long as no legal advice is given to the husband.

Q: Why the caution against "assisting" the husband further?

A: The Panel warned that broader assistance, like giving him a sample answer and counterclaim or helping with his testimony, might constitute legal representation of the adverse party.

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. The Panel treated the divorcing spouses as directly adverse, a nonconsentable posture on these facts, and drew a line between ministerial acts done for the client (handing over a public form, drafting the client's settlement) and giving legal advice or assistance to the opposing pro se party.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.7 / RI RPC 1.7(a) (conflict of interest: general rule; directly adverse clients)

See also

• RI EAP Opinion 2017-02: nonwaivable conflict representing both buyer and seller in a business sale
• RI EAP Opinion 2024-03: representing both buyer and seller in the same real estate sale is a conflict

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%2096-22.pdf

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION # 96-22, - REQUEST # 662
Issued - September 12, 1996

FACTS:

The inquiring attorney represents a woman in an uncontested limited asset divorce. The couple reached an amicable agreement regarding child support and the marital house. The husband, acting pro se, contacted the inquiring attorney to firm up that agreement. The inquiring attorney instructed the husband regarding court procedure such as filing answers and counter claims. The husband then asked for assistance. The inquiring attorney informed him that he/she could not offer legal advice to both parties to a divorce action.

ISSUES PRESENTED:

The inquiring attorney asks whether he/she may assist the husband in the divorce proceeding by (1) providing the husband with a sample answer and counterclaim prepared by the inquiring attorney; (2) providing the husband with a financial statement form (DR-6A) obtained from the Family Court clerk's office; (3) drafting a property settlement agreement reflecting the consensus of the parties; (4) negotiating the portion of the wife's legal fees to be paid by the husband; and (5) assisting the husband in court regarding his testimony.

OPINION:

The inquiring attorney may provide the husband with the DR-6A form and may draft a property settlement agreement on behalf of his client, but may not otherwise assist the husband in the divorce proceeding.

REASONING:

Rule 1.7 entitled "Conflict of Interest: General Rule" applies when an attorney attempts to represent one client against another who has adverse interests. The Rule states in part:

(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.

In this situation, the wife's interests are directly adverse to the husband's interests. The Panel finds that the attorney could not reasonably believe that the representation of the husband will not adversely affect the attorney-client relationship with the wife. The inquiring attorney may not represent both parties and must so notify the husband.

The inquiring attorney may provide the husband with the required DR-6A form that is also available through the Family Court clerk's office, and the attorney may prepare a property settlement as long as he/she does not render any legal advice to the husband. However, the Panel cautions the inquiring attorney against "assisting" the husband with other aspects of the divorce because such assistance might constitute legal representation.