In a conflict with a former client in the same case, representation is allowed only if:

In a conflict with a former client in the same case, representation is allowed only if:

• A. Confidential information published
• B. Client written informed consent
• C. Confidential information published AND client written informed consent
• D. The court orders it

Answer: (C)

When a lawyer would be representing a party against a former client in the same matter, there’s a real risk that confidential information learned from the former client could be used to the former client’s detriment or that loyalties could be divided. The allowed recovery from that risk comes only if two things happen: the former client gives written informed consent to the representation after full disclosure, and the confidential information from the former representation is no longer at issue (i.e., it has been published). If the confidential information remains confidential, or there is no written consent, the representation is not permitted. A court order does not substitute for obtaining the former client’s consent. That’s why this scenario is allowed only when both conditions are met.

When a lawyer would be representing a party against a former client in the same matter, there’s a real risk that confidential information learned from the former client could be used to the former client’s detriment or that loyalties could be divided. The allowed recovery from that risk comes only if two things happen: the former client gives written informed consent to the representation after full disclosure, and the confidential information from the former representation is no longer at issue (i.e., it has been published). If the confidential information remains confidential, or there is no written consent, the representation is not permitted. A court order does not substitute for obtaining the former client’s consent. That’s why this scenario is allowed only when both conditions are met.