Advisory Opinion: 1545

Year Issued: 1994

RPC(s): RPC 1.7; 1.9(a); 1.10(b)

Subject: Conflict of interest; bankruptcy lawyer for creditors provides pro bono advice to debtors at law clinic

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning potential conflicts of interest for lawyers providing pro-bono debtor bankruptcy advice as part of a group neighborhood legal clinic when the lawyer or law firm may represent creditors of the debtor. The Committee was of the opinion that if the lawyer or his or her law firm do not represent any creditors of the debtor client, they do not have any conflict of interest; conversely, if they do represent such a creditor, they have an actual conflict of interest, thus requiring compliance with RPC 1.7. The Committee was of the opinion that the law firm of the attorney could not avail itself of the "screening devices" of RPC 1.10(b) to later represent a creditor, and it would have to obtain consent for such representation pursuant to RPC 1.7(a)(2), and/or RPC 1.9(a). The Committee suggested that such conflicts might be avoided by requiring the debtor client to list the debtor's creditors before meeting with a prospective attorney. However, the Committee did note that this might not prevent problems from arising under the conflicts rule since, in many instances, debtors may not know the actual identity of their creditors.

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.