Can a lawyer be city attorney while a law partner represents the county planning and zoning commission?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether one lawyer could serve as city attorney while his law partner represented the planning and zoning commission for the county in which the city sits. It gave a qualified yes.

The committee found the general question presented no discernible ethics issue, reasoning that the interests of a county planning and zoning commission and a city located within the county are not inherently adverse. It added the caveat that those interests might become adverse in a particular case, in which event its answer might be different.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1976 under Kentucky's former Code of Professional Responsibility (in effect 1971 to 1990), before the Kentucky Bar Association's 1990 adoption of the Rules of Professional Conduct (SCR 3.130) and the substantial 2009 revisions to those rules. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a city attorney's partner represent the county zoning commission?

A: Yes, on the general question. The committee found no inherent conflict because a city and a county planning and zoning commission are not inherently adverse.

Q: Could that answer ever change?

A: Yes. The committee said that if the city's and the commission's interests became adverse in a particular case, its answer might be different.

Background and rules framework

The opinion treated the question as one of conflicting interests between two government clients represented within one firm. The former Code's concurrent-conflict provision was DR 5-105. The modern analogs are Model Rule 1.7 (concurrent conflicts of interest) and Model Rule 1.10 (imputation of conflicts within a firm).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• DR 5-105 (concurrent conflicts of interest); modern analogs Model Rules 1.7 and 1.10

See also

• KBA Ethics Op. E-141: County Attorney vs. County Contract
• KBA Ethics Op. E-167: Office-Sharing With Assistant County Attorney

Source

• Landing page: https://kybar.org/For-Members/Rules-Ethics-Information/Ethics-Opinions
• Original PDF: https://kybar.org/Portals/0/Admin/Ethics%20Opinions/KBA_E-152.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Ethics Opinion KBA E-152
Issued: July 1976

This opinion was decided under the Code of Professional Responsibility, which was in effect from 1971 to 1990. Lawyers should consult the current version of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Comments, SCR 3.130 (available at http://www.kybar.org), before relying on this opinion.

Question:

May a lawyer serve as city attorney while his partner represents the planning and zoning commission for the county in which the city is located?

Answer:

Qualified yes.

OPINION

This general question presents no discernible ethics issue. The interests of a county planning and zoning commission and a city located in the county are not inherently adverse. They may become so in a particular case, in which event our answer may be different.

Note to Reader

This ethics opinion has been formally adopted by the Board of Governors of the Kentucky Bar Association under the provisions of Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.530 (or its predecessor rule). The Rule provides that formal opinions are advisory only.