Attorney Practice Guide
A Conflict-Checking System a Solo Can Actually Run
Running conflict checks from memory works until it doesn't. Here's how to build a system simple enough that it runs every time, without relying on what you happen to remember.
Updated
Conflict checking is one of those obligations that's easy to do casually and dangerous to do casually. The rule is non-negotiable — you have to clear conflicts before taking on a matter — but solos often run the check from memory, which works right up until the day it doesn't, and a missed conflict becomes a disqualification, a malpractice exposure, or a bar complaint. The fix isn't more diligence; it's a system simple enough that you actually run it every time.
What counts as a conflict is governed by your state's rules and your judgment. This is about the operational system that makes sure the check happens, consistently.
Check against a real record, not your memory
The failure mode is "I don't think I've represented anyone adverse to this person." Memory doesn't scale across years of matters, and it's exactly where conflicts slip through. Running every new client against an actual record of your past and current matters turns the check from a recollection into a search — fast, repeatable, and not dependent on what you happen to remember.
Capture adverse parties, not just clients
A check that only searches your client names misses half the picture. The conflict you most need to catch is often with an opposing party — someone adverse to a current or former client. That means capturing opposing parties on your matters as you go, so a new client who turns out to be adverse to an existing client surfaces, and a new matter against a party you've represented surfaces too. Both directions matter.
Run the check at intake, before you're committed
The check has to happen before you take the matter, not after you've already started work. Building it into intake — as a step that happens when a prospective client's name goes in — is what makes it consistent. A check you run "when you remember to" is a check you'll eventually forget on the one matter where it counts.
Keep a record that you ran it
Beyond catching conflicts, there's value in being able to show you checked — a logged record of conflict checks run, with what they returned. If a question ever arises, "here's the check I ran and what it showed" is a far better position than "I'm sure I would have noticed."
Keep the judgment yours
A system flags potential matches; whether something is an actual conflict, and whether it's waivable, is your determination under your rules. The point of the system is to make sure the potential conflict is never invisible — so the judgment you have to make is one you actually get the chance to make.
The payoff
Conflict checking stops being a memory test you pass until you don't. Every new matter gets checked against a real record of clients and adverse parties, at intake, with a log to show for it — so the obligation is met by a routine instead of by luck.
DocketBuddy runs a conflict check at intake against your existing clients and captured opposing parties — both directions — and logs each check, across every practice area. It surfaces potential conflicts for your review; whether something is a conflict, and whether it's waivable, stays your call.