Can a lawyer represent a state agency in third-party claims while also representing other clients who are adverse to that agency?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry concerned the propriety of accepting representation of the Department of Labor and Industries in third-party liability claims while at the same time representing clients adverse to the Department. Assuming that representation of the Department would not be "directly adverse to another client" under RPC 1.7(a), the committee was of the opinion that the lawyer could undertake the representation. If, however, the interests were adverse, the lawyer would need to act in compliance with that rule.

The committee was further of the opinion that if the lawyer were to represent a client and subsequently represent the Department regarding the same claim, the lawyer would need to comply with RPC 1.7(b) and RPC 1.9(b).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1990, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer represent a state agency and also keep clients who are adverse to it?

A: Under this 1990 opinion, yes, so long as representing the agency is not directly adverse to another client under RPC 1.7(a); if the interests are adverse, the lawyer must comply with that rule.

Q: What if the lawyer takes a client and later represents the agency on the same claim?

A: The committee was of the opinion that the lawyer would then need to comply with RPC 1.7(b) and RPC 1.9(b).

Background and rules framework

At the time of this opinion, Washington's RPC 1.7 governed concurrent conflicts (1.7(a) on direct adversity, 1.7(b) on material limitation) and RPC 1.9(b) governed duties to former clients, the subjects the Model Rules place in Rules 1.7 and 1.9. The committee framed the answer conditionally, keying it to whether representing the Department was directly adverse to another client and to whether the same claim was involved.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 1.7 (concurrent conflicts of interest)
• ABA Model Rule 1.9 (duties to former clients)
• Washington RPC 1.7, 1.9(b)

See also

• WA Ethics Op. 1349: Former Agency Lawyer Appearing Before the Agency
• WA Ethics Op. 1350: Former AAG Suing a Former Client College

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=431

Original opinion text

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

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning the propriety of accepting representation of the Department of Labor & Industries in third party liability claims, while at the same time representing clients adverse to the Department. Assuming that representation of the Department would not be "directly adverse to another client" (RPC 1.7(a)), the Committee is of the opinion you could undertake such representation. However, if the interests were adverse then you would need to act in compliance with that rule. Further, the Committee was of the opinion that if you are going to undertake to represent a client and subsequently represent the Department regarding the same claim, you would need to comply with RPC 1.7(b) and RPC 1.9(b).