Here's a riddle. Rule 1.10(b) says that after a lawyer leaves a firm, it may handle a matter adverse to a client the departed lawyer had represented at the firm unless :
"(1) the matter is the same or substantially related to that in which the formerly associated lawyer represented the client; and
(2) any lawyer remaining in the firm has information protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that is material to the matter."
While at firm AB, Jake drafted a contract for client X. The opposite party was Y. Jake leaves AB. No one remaining at AB has information defined in (b)(2).
Question One: Can AB now ETHICALLY represent Y in a dispute with X over the meaning of the contract Jake drafted while at AB?
Question Two: Can AB in that lawsuit ETHICALLY claim that the contract is void as against public policy?
By "ethically" I mean so far as the Rules are concerned. And if the answer is yes to either or both questions, should the Rules be amended?