# Legal ethics question.. **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 5, 2002, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931 "2002-10-05T03:11:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Cyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a88e4f/32.png) [@Cyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyn)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/1 "2002-10-05T03:11:17Z")
Is an attourney in any way bound to not represent someone who is taking legal action against a former client of the attourney in question. Example: My ex had an excellent attourney for our very unpleasant divorce. Is there any reason that same attourney could not represent me in a child support case against him. ---
**Author:** ![Ringo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/779978/32.png) [@Ringo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ringo)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/2 "2002-10-05T03:39:49Z")
I think the attorney in question would have to make the call on whether or not there’s a conflict of interest there. My guess would be yes. ---
**Author:** ![happyheathen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5e925/32.png) [@happyheathen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/happyheathen)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/3 "2002-10-05T04:00:12Z")
my wag: unless the support case could be considered a PART of the divorce (not just arising from it), the atty Could represent you. The person to ask is the atty - even if the atty is free to represent you, he/she has the right to decline - with or without cause. (unless you want to sue an atty - good luck on that one!) ---
**Author:** ![Caffeine.addict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f475e1/32.png) [@Caffeine.addict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caffeine.addict)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/4 "2002-10-05T05:01:37Z")
I can’t find a specific cite for California right now, but I believe the answer is no. The attorney would have a conflict of interest representing _anyone_ against your husband. So in short, the attorney cannot represent anyone against your husband. You’ll have to find another attorney. ---
**Author:** ![happyheathen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5e925/32.png) [@happyheathen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/happyheathen)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/5 "2002-10-05T05:26:32Z")
what if the divorce case was res adjudacata (“case closed”)? would not the atty be discharged from all obligation to the original client? ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 9:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/6 "2002-10-05T09:45:55Z")
From the Law Society of Upper Canada’s “[Rules of Professional Conduct](http://www.lsuc.on.ca/services/contents/rule2.jsp)”: > [@](#): > > 2.04 (4) A lawyer who has acted for a client in a matter shall not thereafter act against the client or against persons who were involved in or associated with the client in that matter: > (a) in the same matter, > (b) in any related matter, or > © save as provided by subrule (5), in any new matter, if the lawyer has obtained from the other retainer relevant confidential information unless the client and those involved in or associated with the client consent. LSUC interprets this to mean: > [@](#): > > It is not improper for the lawyer to act against a client in a fresh and independent matter wholly unrelated to any work the lawyer has previously done for that person and where previously obtained confidential information is irrelevant to that matter. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/7 "2002-10-05T09:51:02Z")
So if you were in Ontario, you could not use your ex’s previous divorce lawyer against him in another divorce because the lawyer would have had relevant confidential information. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/8 "2002-10-05T10:04:26Z")
I live in a community of a hundred-thousand or so in the middle of nowhere. There are enough family lawyers to go around, but occasionally some bright light going through a divorce will speak at length with all the family lawyers in town concerning the divorce. That conflicts the lawyers out, and consequenty severely restricts the spouse’s choices. I’ve never seen a person get nailed for costs for this behaviour (hey, if you were a lawyer, would you complain that your client should be compensated for getting stuck with you?), but the potential for getting slammed exists. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/9 "2002-10-05T11:18:13Z")
A lawyer who has previously represented a client in a matter generally cannot later represent another person in the same matter, or in a substantially related matter, in which his new client’s interests are adverse to the interests of his former client, without the consent of the original client. This is not intended to be a legal opinion or advice – for that, consult an uninvolved lawyer licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. But in my view, the prudent attorney would decline the new case above. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/10 "2002-10-05T12:36:41Z")
What **muffin** said. By the way, it is common for lawyers to sue former clients for unpaid legal bills. ---
**Author:** ![Cyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a88e4f/32.png) [@Cyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyn)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2002, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/11 "2002-10-05T12:47:44Z")
Thank you for all your replies… I kinda figured the answer would be no. I will find another attourney, like **muffin** said there are plenty to go around. Now just for curiosity. Would it make any difference if the cases in question were 8 years apart? Would there be a type of “statue of limitations” that it would be assumed that a clients life situation has changed enough that whatever proprietary knowledge they might have is pretty much irrelevant? Also if I heard correctly my ex never finished paying for his legal fees from the divorce. Would it create any additional problems or incentives on the part of an the attourney in question that the proior client did not hold up his end of their “relationship” Last but not least, any attorney out there heard of any serious, kick ass, mop the floor with most other attourneys, family law types in central CA. Cost is a minimal issue for what I am going to end up paying. FTR I am not trying to just dodge my responsibility. I would happily take full custody of both children to “free him” of the financial burden. ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2002, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/12 "2002-10-08T17:09:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Cyn \* > \*\*Would it make any difference if the cases in question were 8 years apart? Would there be a type of “statue of limitations” that it would be assumed that a clients life situation has changed enough that whatever proprietary knowledge they might have is pretty much irrelevant? \*\* Not really – since every case is different in this regard, there’s no way to craft a rule as to when confidential facts become irrelevant. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2002, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/13 "2002-10-08T20:41:48Z")
> **[The State Bar of California](https://www.calbar.ca.gov/404)** > > Protecting the public & enhancing the administration of justice. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2002, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-ethics-question/130931/14 "2002-10-08T21:01:04Z")
Ethical attorneys will run “conflicts checks” for all potential clients. These checks will not only look at whether the firm or any of its members has a professional or personal relationship with their client’s opponent but also whether they have any such relationships with people that opponent has dealings with which might be adversely affected by lawsuits. Conflict check forms can be enormous.