🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
WSBA 1989

Does the lawyer-as-witness rule stop a lawyer from representing himself, or from being represented by another lawyer in the same firm?

Short answer: The committee concluded that RPC 3.7 is not intended to prevent a lawyer from representing himself or herself in litigation, nor to prevent a lawyer from being represented by another lawyer in the same firm.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1989. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1989
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The inquiry arose from the possible formation of a law partnership between the inquirer's firm and a lawyer who was then representing the inquirer in litigation. The committee considered whether RPC 3.7, the lawyer-as-witness rule, would bar that arrangement. After considerable discussion, it was of the opinion that RPC 3.7 is not intended to prevent a lawyer from representing himself or herself in litigation, nor to prevent a lawyer from being represented by another lawyer in the same firm.

The committee noted that it viewed this as a significant issue of interest to lawyers in the state and said it would consider proposing a formal opinion to the Board of Governors, but it directed that its informal opinion be provided in the meantime.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Does RPC 3.7 stop a lawyer from representing himself in litigation?

A: Under this 1989 opinion, no. The committee said the lawyer-as-witness rule was not intended to prevent self-representation.

Q: Can a lawyer be represented by another lawyer in the same firm?

A: Yes. The committee concluded RPC 3.7 was not intended to prevent a lawyer from being represented by another lawyer in the same firm.

Background and rules framework

RPC 3.7, Washington's version of ABA Model Rule 3.7, restricts a lawyer from acting as advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a necessary witness. The committee read the rule's purpose narrowly here, finding it did not reach a lawyer's self-representation or representation by a same-firm colleague in the litigation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • ABA Model Rule 3.7 (lawyer as witness)
  • Washington RPC 3.7

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning the possible formation of a law partnership between your law firm and a lawyer who is presently representing you in litigation. After considerable discussion, the Committee was of the opinion that RPC 3.7 is not intended to prevent a lawyer from representing him or herself in litigation, nor to prevent a lawyer from presenting another lawyer in the same law firm in litigation. Because the Committee believes this is a significant issue of interest to lawyers in our state, the Committee is going to consider proposing Formal Opinion to the Board of Governors on this. However, they directed that I should give you their informal opinion at this time.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1989 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.