Conflict of Interest Checklist

Intake specialist records the legal name as it appears on a government ID or formation documents — not a DBA, nickname, or trade name. For entity clients, capture the exact registered name plus state of formation; misspellings here are a common reason conflict searches miss real hits.

Include opposing parties, co-parties, key witnesses, related entities (parents, subsidiaries, affiliates), spouses for family/estate matters, and beneficial owners for entity clients. Rule 1.7 imputation under Rule 1.10 reaches related parties — a thin list at this stage is the most common cause of late-discovered conflicts.

If the client is signing on behalf of an entity (corporate officer, trustee, executor, GP), capture both the natural person and the entity, plus the authority documentation (board resolution, trust instrument, letters testamentary). Both must be searched independently.

Use Clio Conflicts, IntApp Open, or the firm's standalone conflicts database. Search every party from the prior step plus common aliases, prior names, and entity short forms. Save the search report with timestamp — bar auditors expect a dated record of the search itself, not just the conclusion.

Apply Rule 1.7 to current-client hits and Rule 1.9 to former-client hits. Read the prior matter description, not just the party name — many false positives resolve quickly, but a substantially-related former matter is a hard block without former-client consent.

Cross-reference the matter against the lateral-hire conflict logs from any attorney or paralegal who joined in the last two years. Imputation under Rule 1.10 reaches their prior-firm representations even if those clients aren't in your database.

Conflicts attorney makes the call: clear, waivable conflict, or non-waivable conflict. Non-waivable includes directly adverse current-client representations on the same matter and most former-client substantially-related matters where consent is unobtainable.

Memo summarizes the parties, the hit, the prior matter, the adversity analysis under Rule 1.7 or 1.9, and the recommended path (waiver, screen, or decline). Managing partner sign-off is required before any waiver letter goes to the client.

For non-waivable conflicts, send a non-engagement letter that does not disclose privileged information about the existing client. State that the firm cannot represent the prospective client and recommend they seek other counsel promptly given any statute of limitations concerns.

Identify the conflict in plain terms, the material risks (loss of confidentiality protections, limits on advocacy, possible withdrawal), reasonably available alternatives, and the right to consult independent counsel before signing. Generic boilerplate waivers fail Rule 1.7(b)(4) — the disclosure must be specific to this matter.

Send via DocuSign or Clio for e-signature. Both the new client and any current/former client whose consent is required must sign. Do not proceed with substantive work until every required signature is in hand.

Configure the screen in NetDocuments or iManage so screened attorneys and paralegals cannot access the matter file. Send the screening notice to all firm personnel and have screened individuals sign an acknowledgment. Screen must be in place before the matter is opened, not after.

Packet includes the conflict search report, the conflict memo, the managing partner approval, the signed waivers, and any screening acknowledgments. Retain for the state bar minimum (typically 5–7 years post matter close; longer for trust-related and estate matters).

Add every party from this matter — client, related entities, opposing, witnesses — into the conflicts database so future intakes will hit on them. Skipping this step is how the next matter's conflict check produces a false negative.

Conflicts attorney signs the clearance certification and unblocks matter open in the PMS. Until this signature lands, the matter cannot be opened and no billable work should be recorded.

When a new party joins (added defendant, third-party complaint, deal-side change, new witness identified in discovery), re-run the conflict search. Conflicts that did not exist at intake commonly arise mid-matter and trigger the same Rule 1.7 analysis.

Cover the firm's conflict-check SOP, lateral-hire screening process, and the Rule 1.7/1.9/1.10 framework. Include a walkthrough of the conflicts database and the escalation path. Counts toward annual ethics CLE in most states.

Quarterly, pull 10 recently-opened matters and verify the conflict packet is complete: search report, memo, partner approval, waivers, database update. Document gaps and corrective actions for the firm's malpractice carrier review.