110316 RIEO, ETH 2016-09

• Case Date: November 03, 2016
• Court: Rhode Island

ETH 2016-09 Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 2016-09 Rhode Island Ethics Opinions Rhode Island Supreme Court November 3, 2016           FINAL          FACTS          The inquiring attorney was asked by Husband to represent him in an imminent divorce action. The inquiring attorney states that he/she previously drafted financial and healthcare powers of attorney for Wife’s parents in which Wife was designated as the successor attorney-in-fact and the alternate health care agent. The inquiring attorney states that he/she has never performed legal work for Wife. Husband and Wife also own and operate a pet care facility, which the inquiring attorney previously used to care for his/her dog.          ISSUE PRESENTED          The inquiring attorney seeks the Panel’s opinion about whether representing Husband in a divorce action against Wife presents a conflict of interest.          OPINION          The inquiring attorney’s drafting of financial and healthcare powers of attorney for Wife’s parents in which Wife is designated the successor attorney-in-fact and alternate healthcare agent, does not present a conflict of interest in the inquiring attorney’s representation of Husband in a divorce action against Wife.          REASONING          The inquiring attorney has never performed legal work for Wife, and therefore Wife is not a former client to whom the inquiring attorney owes obligations under the Rules of Professional Conduct. The inquiring attorney’s former clients were Wife’s parents. To them, the inquiring attorney owes obligations under the Rules, including obligations of confidentiality and loyalty under Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality of information) and Rule 1.9 (Duties to former client). In the event the inquiring attorney learned information about...