Kentucky Lawyer Represents both Clients in an Opposing Action

In Webb v. Kentucky Bar Association, 2009-SC-000642-KB, the Kentucky Supreme Court imposed the sanction of a public reprimand, with conditions, against the attorney who knowingly represented both the plaintiff and defendant of a motor vehicle accident law suit. These additional conditions included directions to attend the Ethics and Professionalism Enhancement Program (EPEP) and pass the test, he was not able to apply for CLE credit of any kind for his attendance at the EPEP, and was required to pay costs in the amount of $34.99.

All members of the Kentucky Supreme Court affirm the decision with all members concurring that Mr. Webb violated SCR 3.130-1.7(b) which, states in part, “A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer’s own interests, unless: (1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected; and (2) the client consents after consultation…” The Kentucky Supreme Court Rules (SCR) listed under the heading of Professional Conduct Rules cover SCR 3.130(1.1) through 1.130(8.4).

Mr. Webb admitted that he violated rules SCR 3.130-1.7(b), which deals with conflict of interest: current clients, when he chose to represent Tina Clauson, the driver of a vehicle involved in a car accident in July 2006. He also chose to represent Phillip Joseph, a passenger in the vehicle hit by Ms. Clauson. When Mr. Webb learned of the conflict, he informed Ms. Clauson that he would no longer be representing her, but he continued to represent Mr. Joseph against Ms. Clauson which is a violation of SCR 3.130-1.9(a), which addresses duties to former clients. Pursuant to SCR 3.380(2), the Kentucky degrees of discipline, Mr. Webb negotiated a sanction of a public reprimand.

This case teaches the importance of the lawyer’s duty under Kentucky SCR 3.130-1.7(b) and 3.130-1.9(a) and federal Rules 1.7 and 1.8 that state a lawyer shall not adversely affect a client(s) due to a conflict of interest in representation.