The Florida Bar
PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OF THE FLORIDA BAR
July 18, 1966
July 18, 1966
An attorney could properly honor a client's request to represent him in a controversy stemming from a previous compromise wherein the client was represented by other counsel.
Chairman MacDonald stated the opinion of the committee:
An intricate factual situation involving the proposed action of a member of The Florida Bar is here presented. The clients in question utilized other counsel to compromise controversies arising in the preliminary stages of a sizeable decedent's estate. The settlement resulted in such counsel assuming the role of personal representative in completing the estate. Subsequent developments in the matters previously settled result in a possible conflict of interest between the clients and the attorney in his capacity as administrator, and raise questions as to efficacy and desirability of the previous settlement. The clients now request the inquirer to represent them in connection with the new controversy, including any dispute with former counsel. The latter, by virtue of the former employment agreement under which he has been fully compensated, offers to afford the clients other counsel at his expense. The inquirer is in doubt as the propriety of assuming this representation, particularly if the proposal of former counsel is in effect an objection to him so acting.
Canon 7 clearly preserves the right of a client to secure additional or substitute counsel, and supports the right of a lawyer to assume such representation. In the event of an objection by existing counsel to the proffer of additional counsel, an attorney may accept the retainer upon the client's relief of the existing counsel. We see no reason why the inquirer may not properly honor the clients' desire for independent counsel.
We express no opinion as to the actions or proposed actions of any counsel other than the inquirer.