I have a friend who has been divorced several years. She was quite young and had no idea of what the law was when this happened. Her and husband had the same attorney and it was an agreed divorce. On this, would it not be a conflict of interest to have the same attorney? Also the husband entered fictitious financial info. Considering the statue of limitations of divorce would this even be worth her time to pursue.
If the parties were in agreement on all issues and the attorney just drafted papers, then most likely there was no conflict. In those circumstances, the attorney actually represents one party, drafts the papers, and then sends them to the other advising them of their right to have them independently reviewed by another attorney should they choose to do so. If they choose not to, then that is their choice.
It would be a conflict of interest, generally. There are some circumstances where it would not: first, if she signed a Waiver of Conflict for the attorney, the attorney could represent both of them. Sometimes, I have people contact me and say they used the same attorney as their ex-spouse, but further review of the files indicates the attorney only represented one or the other and clearly informed them of the same, but one spouse simply did not hire a lawyer because they didn't have any issues with the proposal to settle. In either case, if there was a conflict of interest, that is an ethical violation that could cost the attorney his or her license but does not necessarily mean your friend would recover money. Her time to appeal the divorce was up 30 days after the judge signed the order. If she can prove fraud, she may have a case in some states, but that bar is very very very difficult to meet.
Many states do not allow one lawyer to represent both parties because it is a conflict of interest, but in California, it is allowed, so long as it is consented to and it is an uncontested divorce.
It is never wise to be represented by the same lawyer in a divorce. This could also raise some ethical issues for the lawyer. Who exactly are they representing?
No, it is not worth the time and effort since the appeal period has lapsed. She could file a complaint with the bar association. But it is possible that the attorney disclosed the potential conflict and she agreed to the representation. At that point it wasn't up to the attorney to verify the financial information.
Two parties on the opposite sides of a divorce have inherently different interests. It is a clear violation of professional ethics for an attorney to represent two opposing parties, even if the parties generally agrees on the disposition of the case. Each party is entitled to receive unbiased legal advice and, if necessary, to have their rights staunchly advocated in court. This cannot happen when one person tries to represents both. As this is a clear violation of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct that every attorney knows, a client should run, not walk, from any attorney who claims to be able to provide dual representation.
In Utah, a divorcing couple can utilize the same lawyer, although it's discouraged for the sake of avoiding conflict of interest. A couple can utilize the same lawyer if they are made aware of the potential for conflict of interest and make the informed, voluntary decision in writing to waive that conflict of interest by utilizing one attorney to negotiate a settlement for divorce.
Consumers can use this platform to pose legal questions to real lawyers and receive free insights.
Participating legal professionals get the opportunity to speak directly with people who may need their services, as well as enhance their standing in the Lawyers.com community.