Link to original WordPerfect Document

                                         100 N.J.L.J. 845
                                        September 22, 1977


Appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court


Conflict of Interest
Representing Ex-wife vs. Ex-husband
Partner Previously with Opposing Firm

    Inquiry is made as to whether a law firm may properly represent a wife on a post-divorce motion where a partner in the firm was previously employed as an associate of the opposing firm which is representing the wife's former husband. While employed by the opposing firm the partner served as a nominal officer of two corporations formed by the wife's former husband. The wife was previously employed as a legal secretary for the opposing firm from 1965 to 1970 and that firm represented her in a personal injury claim in 1970. Neither the inquirer nor the opposing firm represented either party in connection with the divorce action.
    We see no conflict of interest on behalf of either law firm in its representation of the ex-wife or the ex-husband on the post-divorce motions. The present representations by both firms are not related to prior representations of the wife or the husband, and this Committee's Opinions 154, 92 N.J.L.J. 353 (1969), and 158, 92 N.J.L.J. 641 (1969), are controlling.
    Upon the unqualified representation that the instant litigation involves solely facts which arose subsequent to the final judgment in the divorce proceedings, this is a new matter for

both law firms and our holding in Opinions 350, 99 N.J.L.J. 777 (1976), and 367, 100 N.J.L.J. 415 (1977) are dispositive.
* * *

This archive is a service of Rutgers University School of Law - Camden