NJSBA Family Law Section

Dave,

Here are the governing RPC's:

RPC 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General rule

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists if:

(1) the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or

(2) there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client, a former client, or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer.

(b) Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of interest under paragraph (a), a lawyer may represent a client if:

(1) each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing, after full disclosure and consultation, provided, however, that a public entity cannot consent to any such representation. When the lawyer represents multiple clients in a single matter, the consultation shall include an explanation of the common representation and the advantages and risks involved;

(2) the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client;

(3) the representation is not prohibited by law; and

(4) the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation or other proceeding before a tribunal.

RPC 1.9 Duties to Former Clients

(a) A lawyer who has represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another client in the same or a substantially related matter in which that client's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client gives informed consent confirmed in writing.

. . .

(c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter . . . shall not thereafter:

(1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client, or when the information has become generally known; or

(2) reveal information relating to the representation except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client.

=========================

I think this is represents both a concurrent conflict of interest and a conflict with a former client.  In both cases, the conflicts are waive-able, in my opinion.  With respect to the prior client, whom you would not be representing, you are not permitted to use information previously obtained "to the disadvantage of the former client."

One path worth considering:  you could ABSOLUTELY serve as a mediator for these people, and it is a natural role for you to play.  As an attorney serving as a mediator, you can prepare a draft Settlement Agreement and refer them out for review to separate lawyers and to finalize the deal.  You would not serve as an advocate or representative for either of them.  Here is the relevant RPC:

RPC 2.4 Lawyer Serving as Third-Party Neutral

(a) A lawyer serves as a third-party neutral when the lawyer assists two or more persons who are not clients of the lawyer to reach a resolution of a dispute or other matter that has arisen between them. Service as a third-party neutral may include service as an arbitrator, a mediator, or in such other capacity as will enable the lawyer to assist the parties to resolve the matter.

(b) A lawyer serving as a third-party neutral shall inform the parties that the lawyer is not representing them. When the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that a party does not understand the lawyer's role in the matter, the lawyer shall explain the difference between the lawyer's role as a third-party neutral and a lawyer's role as one who represents a client.

Hanan

I don't know that clients of former marriage brokers can waive the conflict, but you also have a non-waivable yenta-client privilege until 534 goes into effect.