Advisory Opinion:
1906
Year Issued:
2000
RPC(s):
RPC 1.7; 1.9
Subject:
Conflict of interest; lawyer hired by re-insurer seeks to represent third party against insured in unrelated matter
The inquiring lawyer asked the following: Is a lawyer who was engaged by a re-
insurer to investigate a liability claim in excess of an insured [county's]s self-insured retention, and who examined confidential information in the insured’s file and suggested strategy and defense theories to defense counsel, precluded from representing a third party [hotel] against the insured in an unrelated [tax assessment] matter where the insured believes there is a conflict of interest and refuses to consent pursuant to RPC 1.7(a)(2)?
It is the opinion of the committee that the Rules of Professional Conduct do not prevent you from representing the hotel in the tax assessment matter against the County assuming you are correct that no confidential information was learned by you from the County in the personal injury automobile liability case that will give advantage to the hotel or work to the detriment of the County in the tax assessment matter.
Even assuming the re-insured County was a former client of yours, by your exercising the insurance company’s right, in the absence of a duty to defend the re-insured, the County concedes it is not a current client, so the applicable RPC is 1.9, not RPC 1.7(a)(1) and (2).
Under the facts provided in your inquiry, you are not required pursuant to RPC 1.9(a) to obtain the County’s consent to your representation of the hotel in the unrelated tax assessment matter; nor, from the facts provided by you, does it appear that RPC 1.9(b) precludes you from representing the hotel against the County.
***
