ETHICS OPINION 240
NUMBER 240 1926
Question. A lawyer was formerly employed by X to institute an action against Y. the action was compromised, and Y then employed the lawyer to represent him in a commercial matter. Both employments terminated.
X has now consulted the lawyer with a view to employ him to represent Y‘s wife (the sister of X) in a matrimonial action.
In the opinion of the Committee, should the lawyer’s former employment by Y preclude his acceptance of the present retainer in behalf of Y’s wife, there being no relation whatever in the former employment or in anything then learned by the lawyer to the present controversy between Y and his wife, and Y being presently represented by other counsel?
Answer. H is the opinion of the Committee that the question discloses no fact upon which any contention of professional impropriety could be predicated.