Worked scenario
The firm acted against its own client and found out in court
Conflict checking that only covers one office's records is not conflict checking, and the failure is discovered in the least recoverable way.
4 min read
Every firm runs conflict checks. In a multi-office firm the question is what the check searches, and the honest answer is often the records the checking office happens to hold.
Adverse parties are the harder half
Client names are recorded because they are billed. Opposing parties frequently are not recorded at all in a structured way, which means a search for them returns nothing regardless of how many offices it covers.
The check has to gate intake
A conflict check that runs after a matter is opened is a report, not a control. Gating intake is uncomfortable when a client is waiting, and it is the only arrangement that actually prevents the outcome.
Keeping the evidence
When a conflict is alleged later, the firm's position depends on showing what was searched and when. A check performed and not recorded offers no protection at all, which makes recording it a professional matter rather than an administrative one.
What changes
- Conflict search covering every office's clients and matters
- Adverse parties recorded, not just clients
- Intake blocked until the check completes
- A record of the check itself, kept with the matter
Questions about anything here, or a situation this does not cover? contact@anantatechhub.com

