Law School Wiki

Imputed Disqualification (MR 1.10)

2 min read

Imputed Disqualification (MR 1.10)

Definition

Model Rule 1.10 provides that when any lawyer in a firm is prohibited from representing a client due to a conflict of interest under MR 1.7 or MR 1.9, no other lawyer in that firm may represent the client. Conflicts are imputed across the entire firm. This reflects the principle that members of a law firm are so identified with each other that a conflict affecting one is a conflict affecting all.

Elements

General rule (MR 1.10(a)): No lawyer associated in a firm shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited under MR 1.7 or 1.9.

Exceptions to imputation:

  1. Personal interest conflicts (MR 1.10(a)(1)): Imputation does not apply to a prohibition based solely on the individual lawyer’s personal interest if there is no significant risk that the representation will be materially limited.
  2. Lateral hire screening (MR 1.10(a)(2)): If a lawyer joins a firm and brings a successive conflict under MR 1.9:
    • Prohibited lawyer is timely screened from participation;
    • Prohibited lawyer receives no part of the fee from the matter; AND
    • Written notice is promptly given to affected former client.

Removing imputation when lawyer departs (MR 1.10(b)): After a lawyer has left a firm, the firm may represent a client with interests adverse to a client represented by the departed lawyer if:

  1. The matter is not the same or substantially related; OR
  2. No remaining lawyer has confidential information material to the current matter.

Key Concepts

  • Timely screening: Screens must be implemented promptly upon the lateral’s arrival — cannot be erected after the conflict is identified or after litigation begins.
  • Presumption of shared confidences: Courts presume that lawyers in a firm share confidential information; screening rebuts this presumption for lateral conflicts.
  • Successive imputation: A firm that acquired a conflict through a lateral hire cannot simply let the lawyer leave to cure the conflict if the firm has already been exposed to confidential information.

Policy / Rationale

  • Prevents law firms from serving as vehicles to circumvent individual conflicts.
  • Protects former clients from having their confidences accessible to lawyers who are now adverse.
  • Balances firm-wide conflict avoidance with lawyer mobility (hence the screening exception for laterals).

Courses

Graph View

Backlinks