Bradt v. West
In Bradt v. West, 892 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. App.--Houston 1st Dist. 1994, writ denied), the First Court of Appeals held that an attorney does not have a right of recovery, under any theory, against another attorney arising from conduct in which the second attorney engaged while representing a party in a lawsuit in which the first attorney also represented a party. See 892 S.W.2d at 71-72.
In that case, the appellate court explained as follows:
The public has an interest in "loyal, faithful and aggressive representation by the legal profession. . . ." An attorney is thus charged with the duty of zealously representing his clients within the bounds of the law. In fulfilling this duty, an attorney "has the right to interpose any defense or supposed defense and make use of any right in behalf of such client or clients as the attorney deems proper and necessary, without making himself subject to liability in damages. . . ." Any other rule would act as a severe and crippling deterrent to the ends of justice for the reason that a litigant might be denied a full development of his case if his attorney were subject to the threat of liability for defending his client's position to the best and fullest extent allowed by law, and availing his client of all rights to which he is entitled. Id. at 71.