1. TOPIC J: DUTIES TO FORMER CLIENTS
2016 P.R.
Prof. Janicke

2. TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS
THE MAIN RULE R. 1.9(a)
LAWYER CANNOT TAKE ON A NEW CLIENT:
AGAINST HER FORMER CLIENT, IF:
THE NEW MATTER IS “SUBSTANTIALLY RELATED” TO THE PAST WORK
(ii) PAST CLIENT INFO FLOWED INTO FIRM
PRESUMED TO BE THE CASE
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

3. FORMER FIRM’S CLIENT R. 1.9(b)
LAWYER CANNOT TAKE CASE AGAINST HER FORMER FIRM’S CLIENT IF:
MATTERS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY RELATED; and
THIS LAWYER WAS PRIVY TO NOW-RELEVANT INFO
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

4. TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS
THE MOBILE LAWYER RULES R. 1.9(b), R. 1.10(a)(2) (PERMISSIVE RULES NOT ADOPTED IN TEXAS)
WHEN A LAWYER MOVES TO ANOTHER FIRM, WHO ARE HIS “FORMER CLIENTS”?
AND DOES HE INFECT EVERYONE ELSE AT THE NEW FIRM (WHO OTHERWISE COULD TAKE ON AN ADVERSE CLIENT)?
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

5. ABA RULE 1.9 PROVIDES SOME RELIEF
A “MOVED” LAWYER CAN NOW TAKE ON RELATED MATTERS, PROVIDED SHE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CONFIDENTIAL CLIENT INFO WHILE AT THE “OLD” FIRM R. 1.9(b)
[OR HAS INFORMED CONSENT] [PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO GET]
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

6. TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS
R PROVIDES SOME RELIEF FOR THE “NEW” COLLEAGUES:
IF THE LAWYER HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THE (NOW) FORMER CLIENT’S WORK, SHE REMAINS DISQUALIFIED IN ADVERSE RELATED MATTERS
BUT SHE CAN AVOID INFECTING OTHERS AT THE NEW FIRM, BY TIMELY NOTICE AND SCREENING PROCEDURES R. 1.10(a)(2)
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

7. TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS
R NOT NEEDED IF:
IF THE LAWYER DID NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE FORMER CLIENT’S WORK; NEITHER SHE NOR HER NEW FIRM IS DISQUALIFIED
SCREENING IS NOT NEEDED
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

8. WHERE NO ONE CHANGES FIRMS
WITHIN A SINGLE GIVEN FIRM THAT HAS DONE WORK FOR A FORMER CLIENT:
THE FIRM IS USUALLY DISQUALIFIED IN RELATED MATTERS
SCREENING IS OFTEN OFFERED WHEN RELATEDNESS IS DOUBTFUL, BUT DOES NOT FIT R. 1.9(b) OR 1.10, AND USUALLY DOES NOT WORK
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

9. A RARE EXCEPTION – THE FORMER NEUTRAL
LAWYER SERVES AS JUDGE OR NEUTRAL
LATER, IN A RELATED MATTER, ONE PARTY NOW WANTS TO ENGAGE LAWYER’S FIRM
OK, IF THE FORMER NEUTRAL IS SCREENED OUT [or INFORMED CONSENT OF ALL PARTIES] R. 1.12(c)
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

10. USE OF FORMER CLIENT INFO
EVEN IF THERE IS NO ADVERSE RELATED MATTER NOW AT HAND (SO NO ONE IS DISQUALIFIED)
STILL NEED TO PROTECT FORMER CLIENT’S INFO AGAINST DISADVANTAGE TO THAT CLIENT R. 1.9(c)
UNTIL INFO IS GENERALLY KNOWN
THEN CAN BE USED, EVEN TO FORMER CLIENT’S DISADVANTAGE
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS

11. TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS
THE NO-USE RULE WOULD APPLY TO LAWYERS USING FORMER-CLIENT INFO FOR THE LAWYERS’ OWN BENEFIT (e.g. INVESTMENTS)
OR TO HELP OTHER CLIENTS WITHOUT REVEALING THE INFO
2016
TOPIC J -- CONFLICTS RE. FORMER CLIENTS