Does a lawyer representing a corporation against its employee's unemployment claim face a former-client conflict or a lawyer-as-witness problem?
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.
Plain-English summary
Because of the limited facts presented in the hypothetical question, the committee could only give the opinion that the lawyer representing the corporation contesting the unemployment claim of its employee had to comply with RPC 1.9.
The committee also noted that it might be that the lawyer involved would be required to be a witness in any litigation, and therefore RPC 3.7 might also apply.
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 and RPC 3.7 on a lawyer as a witness were 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: What did the committee decide about the unemployment-claim representation?
A: On the limited facts, the committee could only say that the lawyer representing the corporation contesting its employee's unemployment claim had to comply with RPC 1.9.
Q: Why might RPC 3.7 come into play?
A: The committee noted that the lawyer involved might be required to be a witness in any litigation, in which case RPC 3.7 on a lawyer as a witness might also apply.
Background and rules framework
The opinion points to Washington RPC 1.9 on duties to former clients (corresponding to Model Rule 1.9) and RPC 3.7 on a lawyer as a witness (corresponding to Model Rule 3.7). Because the inquiry stated only limited facts, the committee did not resolve the conflict or the lawyer-as-witness question; it identified the rules that would govern.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Washington RPC 1.9 (duties to former clients), corresponding to Model Rule 1.9.
- Washington RPC 3.7 (lawyer as a witness), corresponding to Model Rule 3.7.
See also
- WSBA Ethics Op. 986: adverse to prior clients and a codefendant
- WSBA Ethics Op. 1042: a firm lawyer in the firm's suit against a former client
- WSBA Ethics Op. 998: a firm lawyer as an impeachment witness when a colleague tries the case
Source
- Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=168
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
Advisory Opinion: 1057
Year Issued: 1986
RPC(s): RPC 1.9; 3.7
Subject: Conflict of interest; unemployment claim against corporation represented by lawyer; lawyer as witness
Because of the limited facts presented in your hypothetical question, the Committee could only give the opinion that the lawyer representing the corporation contesting the unemployment claim of its employee must comply with RPC 1.9. The Committee also noted that it might be that the lawyer involved would be required to be a witness in any litigation, and therefore RPC 3.7 might also apply.
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.