Legal Ethics Opinion No. 1387 Estate Planning/Administration--Conflict of Interest--Attorney As Witness: Attorney/Co-Executor Representing the Estate While Serving As Co-Trustee of the Residuary Trust You have indicated that the co-executor of an estate is a partner in a law firm and is also one of several co-trustees of a trust created by the residuary clause of the same will. The testator also provided in his will that the co-executor's law firm represent the estate. You have requested that the committee consider the propriety of the firm's undertaking the representation as to matters of estate administration. The appropriate and controlling disciplinary rule applicable to the circumstances you describe is DR 5-l0l(A) which precludes a lawyer from accepting employment if the exercise of his professional judgment on behalf of his client may be affected by his own financial, business, property, or personal interests, except with the consent of his client after full and adequate disclosure under the circumstances. The committee has earlier opined that an attorney who serves as fiduciary to a trust or estate and additionally engages his law firm as attorney for the same entity presents a personal conflict as described by DR 5-l0l(A). In such a situation, the attorney's own financial, business, or personal interest may potentially affect the exercise of his professional judgment on behalf of the trust or estate. See LEO #l358. Furthermore, in rendering LEO #l358, the committee analogized the dual roles of fiduciary and lawyer administering the estate to earlier conclusions reached wherein LEO #l353 found no impropriety in a corporate Assistant General Counsel referring his corporate client to an outside law firm with which he was affiliated as "of counsel," provided that the outside law firm maintain direct communication with individuals within the corporation other than the Assistant General Counsel/outside law firm "of counsel." Thus, it is not per seimproper for an executor or trustee ("fiduciary/partner") to engage his own law firm to represent matters of estate administration. Since the facts you present indicate that the individual in question is both a co-trustee and co-executor, it is the committee's opinion that the consent of the co-fiduciaries must be obtained prior to the firm's taking on representation of the estate. In addition, the committee urges that the co-fiduciaries, rather than the fiduciary/partner maintain the necessary communication with the firm throughout the administration of the estate. See also LEOs #257, 370; N.H. Ethics Op. l987-8/9 (Sept. 23, l988), ABA/BNA Lawyer's Man. on Prof. Conduct 90l:570l. Finally, the committee cautions that DR 5-l0l(B) and DR 5-l02(A) preclude a lawyer from accepting or continuing employment if he knows or it is obvious that he or a lawyer in his firm ought to be called as a witness [in any contemplated or pending litigation] except in very limited circumstances. Therefore, should it become necessary for the fiduciary/partner to testify at either a probate hearing or at any ensuing litigation, it would be necessary for the firm to withdraw from representation unless such testimony would relate solely to an uncontested matter or to a matter of formality and then only if there were no reason to believe that substantial evidence would be offered in opposition to the testimony. Committee Opinion November 30, 1990
|