Advisory Opinion: 1643

Year Issued: 1995

RPC(s): RPC 4.2

Subject: Direct communication with an insurance adjuster after counsel appears on insured

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning conduct of a plaintiff`s counsel having direct communication with an insurance adjuster after counsel had appeared in an action on behalf of an insured. You pointed out an apparent conflict between Formal Opinion 137 and Tank v. State Farm Insurance. Upon review, the Committee agreed there was a conflict between the 1968 Formal Opinion and the 1986 Supreme Court Opinion. The Committee is recommending that the Board of Governors withdraw Formal Opinion 137. [Editor`s Note: Fornmal Opinion 137 has been withdrawn by the BOG].

Further, the Committee was of the opinion that RPC 4.2 would not prohibit plaintiff`s counsel from communicating directly with an insurance adjuster unless that adjuster were independently represented by counsel.

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.