conflict of interest-divorce

[missshellie]

Hi, I live in Tennessee. My husband and I have both filed for a divorce. At the moment, I am pro se because i have been a homaker for 13 years. I just found out that his lawyer is someone that I have already had a free consultation with. Is this legal and ethical for him to continue with my husband after already receiving a lot of private info from me? We are due for mediation in less than 2 weeks and would not like to have this lawyer present. i feel that it would put me at an unfair advantage. Any advice?
thanks missshellie

 

[mistoffolees]

Hi, I live in Tennessee. My husband and I have both filed for a divorce. At the moment, I am pro se because i have been a homaker for 13 years. I just found out that his lawyer is someone that I have already had a free consultation with. Is this legal and ethical for him to continue with my husband after already receiving a lot of private info from me? We are due for mediation in less than 2 weeks and would not like to have this lawyer present. i feel that it would put me at an unfair advantage. Any advice?
thanks missshellie

No, it is not ethical. Contact the attorney and tell him that you consider it unethical. He may simply not have known that your husband is your husband. Point out to him that you consulted with him and he is now representing your husband and ask him to withdraw voluntarily. If he does not withdraw you will have to report him to the State Bar.

I would suggest that you get an attorney. The attorney can petition the court to be paid from marital assets.

 

[Ronin]

I disagree. Many lawyers make it clear that a free consultation does not in itself constitute an attorney-client relationship or generate a conflict of interest. I once overheard a person saying he had several free consultations with known good attorneys with an intent to make those attorneys ineligible to represent his spouse. Now that is highly unethical, and I doubt it worked.

 

[LdiJ]

I disagree. Many lawyers make it clear that a free consultation does not in itself constitute an attorney-client relationship or generate a conflict of interest. I once overheard a person saying he had several free consultations with known good attorneys with an intent to make those attorneys ineligible to represent his spouse. Now that is highly unethical, and I doubt it worked.

Well, I disagree with you. Its common knowledge that a consult, even a free one, can generate a conflict of interest. The level of information that is imparted in the consult determines whether or not there is a conflict of interest. A full fledged consult would have enough information exchanged to generate a conflict of interest.

 

[Ronin]

Well, I disagree with you. Its common knowledge that a consult, even a free one, can generate a conflict of interest.

Then the reality is that a spouse planning a divorce can eliminate some legal competition by divulging enough information in a free consult with other attorneys who could cause the most trouble or offer their spouse the strongest legal defense? If challenged, the offending spouse could claim they were simply shopping for attorneys in good faith.

My divorce was litigated in a small town with my ex hiring a local shark who is short on ethics. If I had not been able to retain the only local attorney with the reputation, experience, and ability to stand up to this attorney, my case would have ended much differently.

I would like to hear O.G.'s take on this.

 

[penelope10]

I can only speak from experience on this one. I had a consult with a well known attorney in my area while I was contemplating divorce from OZ. Because it was a consult this attorney did not keep a good record of our meeting.

OZ then went in and had a consult with the same attorney a couple of months later. This attorney did not connect the dots that OZ was my stbx.

Then several months later I went in to actually hire this attorney. It wasn't until more details were revealed that he realized he had given a consult to both of us. He felt that it would be a conflict of interest if he represented either of us. (Despite the fact that my consult had been first) He gave me the name of another attorney (with a different firm) that I ended up using.

I have known of some folks that have done the consult game in order to attempt to stop their stbx from using a particular attorney. In fact, the original attorney told me that this is what he thought OZ had done. (We had recommended this attorney to a friend who was getting a divorce, therefore, OZ probably figured that I would go to this same attorney).

 

[Ohiogal]

Then the reality is that a spouse planning a divorce can eliminate some legal competition by divulging enough information in a free consult with other attorneys who could cause the most trouble or offer their spouse the strongest legal defense? If challenged, the offending spouse could claim they were simply shopping for attorneys in good faith.

My divorce was litigated in a small town with my ex hiring a local shark who is short on ethics. If I had not been able to retain the only local attorney with the reputation, experience, and ability to stand up to this attorney, my case would have ended much differently.

I would like to hear O.G.'s take on this.

Actually it is considered unethical for an attorney to take such a case. And if OP makes a big deal about this he should recuse himself or he may be the subject of an ethics investigation. There is case law that states that giving a consultation without further retainer can provide enough for there to be attorney client confidentiality. Depends on what was disclosed during said consultation.

 

[Ohiogal]

I disagree. Many lawyers make it clear that a free consultation does not in itself constitute an attorney-client relationship or generate a conflict of interest. I once overheard a person saying he had several free consultations with known good attorneys with an intent to make those attorneys ineligible to represent his spouse. Now that is highly unethical, and I doubt it worked.

It doesn't matter if an attorney says that in a free consultation. Attorneys are NOT allowed to do quite a few things including restrict their responsibility. Posting on a public forum with details is a bit different as there is NO confidentiality and no expectation of confidentiality. There can be none in public.

 

[Ronin]

I stand corrected.

It's unfortunate something like this can potentially be manipulatively abused with impunity.

 

[Ohiogal]

I stand corrected.

It's unfortunate something like this can potentially be manipulatively abused with impunity.

It can. But many attorneys will not just do consults with ANYONE. Nor will they do them if they believe someone is attorney shopping.