Opinion 916

The Committee discussed your inquiry concerning whether a prosecuting attorney's office, charged by statute with the obligation to bring support enforcement actions under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act against non-custodial parents, could represent two parties attempt to collect child support from one common parent, wherein a conflict might exist if there were not sufficient funds to pay the entire claims of both claiming parents. After considerable discussion, the Committee determined by a 9-0 vote that a prosecutor could not undertake the representation unless the prosecutor reasonably believed the representation would not adversely affect the representation of the other client, and each client consents in writing after a full disclosure of the material facts relating to the common representation and the advantages and risks involved, as required by RPC 1.7(b). The Committee was further of the opinion that the proposed letters to clients submitted by you do not provide sufficient information for the client to give knowing consent to such multiple representation.

Advisory Opinions are provided for the education of the Bar and reflect the opinion of the Committee on Professional Ethics (CPE) or its predecessors. Advisory Opinions are provided pursuant to the authorization granted by the Board of Governors, but are not individually approved by the Board and do not reflect the official position of the Bar association. Laws other than the Washington State Rules of Professional Conduct may apply to the inquiry. The Committee's answer does not include or opine about any other applicable law other than the meaning of the Rules of Professional Conduct.