Careers

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Experience

Innovation

Interactive Maps

Locations

About

Pages

Meet our team of innovators
Ask us how we do it

Professionals

Insights

Services

Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 11 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times and was 1 of 7 firms shortlisted for The American Lawyer’s inaugural Legal Services Innovation Award. The firm has been recognized by the National Law Journal as a Legal Technology Trailblazer and featured by Bloomberg for its innovative service delivery models, which drive accuracy and predictability. The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTHTM – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals. For more information, please visit ThompsonHine.com and ThompsonHine.com/SmartPaTH.

Home | Thompson Hine LLP

Atlanta

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Dayton

Los Angeles

Minneapolis

New York

Silicon Valley

Washington, D.C.

Can a&nbsp;non-lawyer staff member who joins your firm bring with her a conflict of interest that may be imputed to your firm&nbsp;and disqualify you from representing your client?&nbsp; It can happen.
In this age of employment mobility, staff members may come to your firm after having worked for opposing counsel on cases (or transactions) that you are handling.&nbsp; The staffer&rsquo;s exposure to the other side&rsquo;s confidential information can raise a conflict of interest that&nbsp;knocks you and your whole firm&nbsp;out of the box.
Many jurisdictions allow law firms to resolve the potential problem at the front end with an ethical screen.&nbsp; Georgia has recently&nbsp;joined the list.
In <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/georgia/supreme-court/2014/s13g1626.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Hodge v. URFA-Sexton, LP</a>, the Georgia Supreme Court noted that the majority of courts reject the idea that non-lawyer conflicts are&nbsp;automatically imputed to the rest of the firm.&nbsp; Rather, most jurisdictions now&nbsp;allow firms to raise a screen to protect the confidential information that a non-lawyer has gained during prior employment.
This made sense to the Hodge court for several reasons:
<ul>
<li>Non-lawyers lack a financial interest in the outcome of litigation, and don&rsquo;t have a choice about what clients they serve;</li>
<li>Non-lawyers have different training and responsibilities, and a different level of access to confidential information than lawyers do;</li>
<li>Disqualifying a firm based on a staff member&rsquo;s conflict of interest works a hardship to the new firm&rsquo;s client;&nbsp;and</li>
<li>A rule of automatic imputation would unduly restrict non-lawyer employment mobility.</li>
</ul>
Interestingly, Georgia limits screening as a way to avoid imputed conflicts of interest &mdash; only former public sector employees, arbitrators and judges (and now non-lawyers) can be screened in order for the firm to avoid being disqualified.
In Ohio, non-lawyer screening was approved in <a title="Green v. Toledo Hospital" href="http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2002/2002-ohio-1482.pdf">Green v. Toledo Hospital</a>, where the Ohio Supreme Court held that imposing the presumption that a secretary who worked for opposing counsel shared in client confidences would &ldquo;unfairly taint&rdquo; her.&nbsp;&nbsp;Applying the presumption would make it particularly difficult for non-lawyer personnel in small towns, where the pool of available employers (and employees) is limited.
Other jurisdictions have adopted similar rules, either&nbsp;via ethics opinions or decisional law, including the <a href="https://filehost.thompsonhine.com/uploads/DC-Legal-Ethics-Opinion_227_72ce.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">District of Columbia</a>, <a href="http://www.nysba.org/CustomTemplates/Content.aspx?id=5399">New York, Florida</a>, <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/nevada/supreme-court/2003/39683-1.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Nevada </a>and <a href="http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?cite=51+p.3d+562">Oklahoma</a>.
When a non-lawyer staff member migrates to your firm, remember that you may need to consider a timely ethical screen in order to prevent a costly disqualification headache.

core/freeform

Ethics

Screening paralegals may avoid conflict problem