What consitutes conflict of interest?

[AmyAmers]

I live in Virginia and was recently "attorney shopping" for an impending case, and have heard through the grape vine that my opposing side is gathering the funds to retain a lawyer that I had a consultation with. I was told this would be a conflict of interest given the information he has already received from me, is that correct?

 

[Ohiogal]

I live in Virginia and was recently "attorney shopping" for an impending case, and have heard through the grape vine that my opposing side is gathering the funds to retain a lawyer that I had a consultation with. I was told this would be a conflict of interest given the information he has already received from me, is that correct?

Could almost possibly be. How many attorneys have you "attorney shopped" for the impending case? What kind of case is this?

 

[AmyAmers]

I have spoken to two other attorneys including the one I have chosen to represent me. It is a custody case.

 

[BigMouthWino]

I have spoken to two other attorneys including the one I have chosen to represent me. It is a custody case.

Yes, it creates a conflict and you should immediately deliver a letter to the attorney that you provided him with confidential, privileged information during your consultation and if he goes forward with representing an opposing party you will file a complaint with the state bar and have the attorney you ultimately retained file a motion with the court to disqualify him as counsel.

 

[Ohiogal]

Yes, it creates a conflict and you should immediately deliver a letter to the attorney that you provided him with confidential, privileged information during your consultation and if he goes forward with representing an opposing party you will file a complaint with the state bar and have the attorney you ultimately retained file a motion with the court to disqualify him as counsel.

Only if she gave confidential/privileged information regarding her case to the attorney and didn't ask general questions.

 

[BigMouthWino]

Only if she gave confidential/privileged information regarding her case to the attorney and didn't ask general questions.

It is pretty difficult to give a thorough consultation to a potential client in a custody matter without discussing confidential and privileged information about their case.

You receive your "clients" through court appointments so I can see how this would be difficult for you to understand.

 

[Just Blue]

It is pretty difficult to give a thorough consultation to a potential client in a custody matter without discussing confidential and privileged information about their case.

You receive your "clients" through court appointments so I can see how this would be difficult for you to understand.

Are you really this stupid? ????????????

BTW: How do YOU receive your "clients"? INTERNET?

 

[BigMouthWino]

Are you really this stupid? ????????????

BTW: How do YOU receive your "clients"? INTERNET?

Are you? Or are you just running to another Senior Members defense after she posted something incredibly ludicrous in response to OP's question.

My advice to OP stands, this is the best course of action for preventing the other party from retaining an attorney you consulted with:

You should immediately deliver a letter to the attorney that you provided him with confidential, privileged information during your consultation and if he goes forward with representing an opposing party you will file a complaint with the state bar and have the attorney you ultimately retained file a motion with the court to disqualify him as counsel.

 

[Ohiogal]

It is pretty difficult to give a thorough consultation to a potential client in a custody matter without discussing confidential and privileged information about their case.

You receive your "clients" through court appointments so I can see how this would be difficult for you to understand.

She might consider something a consultation which the Courts do not consider a consultation. Since you have no clue about legal matters, I can see how this would be difficult for YOU to understand.

 

[Ohiogal]

Are you? Or are you just running to another Senior Members defense after she posted something incredibly ludicrous in response to OP's question.

My advice to OP stands, this is the best course of action for preventing the other party from retaining an attorney you consulted with:

You should immediately deliver a letter to the attorney that you provided him with confidential, privileged information during your consultation and if he goes forward with representing an opposing party you will file a complaint with the state bar and have the attorney you ultimately retained file a motion with the court to disqualify him as counsel.

Actually you are the one posting something ludicrous. Depends on the situation in which she received the information, what information she provided, and various other things. I am in correct in what I posted. You are apparently on your continuous bender.

 

[BigMouthWino]

Actually you are the one posting something ludicrous. Depends on the situation in which she received the information, what information she provided, and various other things. I am in correct in what I posted. You are apparently on your continuous bender.

Let me ask your something OhioGAL - Do you know how to read? This is what I told OP to send to the attorney, twice:

You should immediately deliver a letter to the attorney that you provided him with confidential, privileged information during your consultation and if he goes forward with representing an opposing party you will file a complaint with the state bar and have the attorney you ultimately retained file a motion with the court to disqualify him as counsel.

I don't know how to make it clearer than that. Have you ever had a private client? Or just children thrown at you by the courts that have no choice as to their legal representation? Court appointed attorneys sicken me both in the quality of their work and the way they treat their "clients." One cannot provide a client a proper consultation without gathering sufficient private and confidential facts about their matter to give them an opinion and proposed strategy. Then it's up to the client to decide if they want to move forward. But if the private client doesn't hire you that pretty much bars you (and frequently even another lawyer at your firm - if you are with a firm with even a modicum of ethics) from taking on their opposing party as a client.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Court appointed attorneys sicken me

Nothing has provided me with a greater desire to do court appointed work than the knowledge that it will sicken you.

It also appears that you are not familiar with the Rules of Professional Conduct in regards to prospective clients, since you didn't bother quoting them, you only made up your own.

 

[BigMouthWino]

Nothing has provided me with a greater desire to do court appointed work than the knowledge that it will sicken you.

More accurately: nothing will provide you with a greater desire to do court appointed work than financial necessity since your legal abilities fail to attract paying clients and you are forced to live off the taxpayer much like a welfare recipient.

It also appears that you are not familiar with the Rules of Professional Conduct in regards to prospective clients, since you didn't bother quoting them, you only made up your own.

Ask and you shall receive:

Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.9

Rule 1.9 Conflict of Interest: Former Client

(a) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person’s interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless both the present and former client consent after consultation.

(b) A lawyer shall not knowingly represent a person in the same or a substantially related matter in which a firm with which the lawyer formerly was associated had previously represented a client

(1) whose interests are materially adverse to that person; and

(2) about whom the lawyer had acquired information protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that is material to the matter; unless both the present and former client consent after consultation.

Viriginia Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.10

Rule 1.10 Imputed Disqualification: General Rule

(a) While lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so by Rules 1.6, 1.7, 1.9, or 2.10(e).

(b) When a lawyer has terminated an association with a firm, the firm is not prohibited from thereafter representing a person with interests materially adverse to those of a client represented by the formerly associated lawyer and not currently represented by the firm, unless:

(1) the matter is the same or substantially related to that in which the formerly associated lawyer represented the client; and

(2) any lawyer remaining in the firm has information protected by Rules 1. 6 and 1.9(c) that is material to the matter.

(c) A disqualification prescribed by this Rule may be waived by the affected client under the conditions stated in Rule 1.7.

(d) The imputed prohibition of improper transactions is governed by Rule 1.8(k).

(e) The disqualification of lawyers associated in a firm with former or current government lawyers is governed by Rule 1.11.

Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct - Conflict of Interest

Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General Rule

(a) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client will be directly adverse to another existing client, unless:

(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not adversely affect the relationship with the other client; and

(2) each client consents after consultation.

(b) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer’s own interests, unless:

(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected; and

(2) the client consents after consultation. When representation of multiple clients in a single matter is undertaken, the consultation shall include explanation of the implications of the common representation and the advantages and risks involved.

 

[ecmst12]

So you can copy and paste, but you cannot, apparently, READ.

 

[BigMouthWino]

So you can copy and paste, but you cannot, apparently, READ.

What do you fail to understand from the RPC? The attorney may not represent a new client with interests adverse to a former client. An attorney-client relationship is formed at the initial consultation when confidential/privileged information is exchanged and/or money. Most family law attorneys (the better ones anyway) do not offer free consultations.