Can a firm sue a former client on a matter unrelated to the work it once did for that client?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry described a law firm that had represented a developer regarding zoning plat A. Several years after that representation ended, a homeowner's association retained the firm to sue the developer for construction deficiencies in plat B, which was unrelated to plat A.

The committee concluded that, on those facts, the firm's previous representation of the developer was not related to the present litigation. The firm could therefore undertake to represent the homeowner's association, provided that the representation would not involve any secrets or confidences the firm had gained during its representation of the developer.

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 was 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a firm take a case against someone it used to represent?

A: On these facts, yes. The committee concluded the firm could represent the new client because its prior representation of the developer was not related to the present litigation.

Q: What condition did the committee attach?

A: The committee said the new representation could go forward provided it would not involve any secrets or confidences the firm gained during its earlier representation of the developer.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Washington RPC 1.9 as it stood in 1986, the rule on duties to a former client (corresponding to Model Rule 1.9). The committee applied it to a firm asked to sue a former client in a matter unrelated to the earlier work, treating the lack of relationship between the two matters and the absence of confidences from the prior representation as the conditions permitting the new representation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Washington RPC 1.9 (duties to former clients), corresponding to Model Rule 1.9.

See also

• WSBA Ethics Op. 950: representation adverse to a former client in unrelated litigation
• WSBA Ethics Op. 968: representing someone harmed by a former client
• WSBA Ethics Op. 962: a former-client conflict between adverse claimants to a death claim

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=86

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 975
Year Issued: 1986
RPC(s): RPC 1.9
Subject: Conflict of interest; lawsuit against former client in unrelated matter

[A law firm represented a developer regarding zoning plat A. Several years after the completion of that representation, a homeowner's association retained the law firm to sue the developer for construction deficiencies in plat B, which is unrelated to plat A.] Based upon the facts as set out in your inquiry, it appears that your firm's previous representation of [the developer], is not related to the present litigation between [the homeowner's association] and [the developer] and therefore you could undertake to represent [the homeowner's association] provided that such representation would not involve any secrets or confidences you gained during your representation of [the developer].