2005-50.

• Court: Oregon

Oregon Ethics Opinions 2005. 2005-50. FORMAL OPINION NO. 2005-50Conflicts of Interest, Current Clients:Office Sharers Representing Opposing Parties Facts: Lawyer A and Lawyer B, who maintain independent practices, share office space. Both lawyers handle personal injury litigation. Questions: 1. May Lawyer A represent the plaintiff in a lawsuit in which Lawyer B represents the defendant? 2. Would the answer be different if Lawyer A and Lawyer B share a common employee who is in possession of confidences and secrets of both Lawyer A's clients and Lawyer B's clients? Conclusions: 1. Yes, qualified. 2. Yes. Discussion: If Lawyer A and Lawyer B were part of the same firm, the simultaneous representation of a plaintiff and a defendant in the same litigation would give rise to a prohibited, nonwaivable conflict of interest. See, e.g., Oregon RPC 1.7,(fn1) discussed in OSB Formal Ethics Op No 2005-28. Nevertheless, and as long as Lawyer A and Lawyer B (1) do not hold themselves out to the public as members of the same firm through joint advertising, a joint letterhead, or otherwise; (2) respect the confidentiality of information relating to the representation of their respective clients and cause their employees to do so; and (3) keep their respective files separately, there is no reason why Lawyer A and Lawyer B cannot represent opposite parties. See also Oregon RPC 1.0(d).(fn2) We do not believe that these requirements prohibit office sharers from using the same telephone system or the same file room as long as the files are physically separated and the appropriate limitations on access to files are made clear to, and are observed by, the lawyers and their employees. If a common telephone system is used, however, office sharers may not represent adverse parties unless they have taken steps to assure that telephone messages that contain confidential client information or legal advice (i.e., information relating to the representation of a client(fn3)) are not given to or transmitted by shared personnel. Similarly, mail must not be opened by shared personnel. If, on the other hand, Lawyer A and Lawyer B share a secretary or other employee who is in possession of the confidences or secrets of both Lawyer A's clients and Lawyer B's clients, or if any of the other steps outlined above are not taken, the simultaneous...