Can an elected county attorney represent a private employer in a labor dispute?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether an elected county attorney could represent an employer in connection with a labor dispute. The committee answered yes.

Its reasoning was brief. Because the Commonwealth of Kentucky did not prohibit county attorneys from the civil practice of law unrelated to their criminal practice, the committee found no inhibition, ethical or otherwise, against a county attorney representing any party to civil litigation unconnected with criminal litigation, whether that party was a labor union or an employer.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1971 under the former Code of Professional Responsibility, 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. The conflict and government-lawyer principles it touched are now addressed by Model Rule 1.7 (concurrent conflicts) and Model Rule 1.11 (current and former government officers), with Kentucky's counterparts at SCR 3.130. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a county attorney take on a private labor-dispute client?

A: Yes. The committee found no ethical bar to a county attorney representing a party in civil litigation, including a labor dispute, that was unconnected with criminal litigation.

Q: Did it matter whether the client was the employer or the union?

A: No. The committee said the representation could be of a labor union or an employer, so long as the civil matter was unconnected with criminal litigation.

Q: What was the basis for allowing it?

A: The committee relied on the fact that Kentucky did not prohibit county attorneys from civil practice unrelated to their criminal practice.

Background and rules framework

The opinion rested on the scope of a county attorney's permitted civil practice in Kentucky rather than on a specific disciplinary rule. The modern framework for evaluating such situations is Model Rule 1.7 (concurrent conflicts of interest) and Model Rule 1.11 (conflicts for current and former government officers and employees), with Kentucky's counterparts at SCR 3.130.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Code of Professional Responsibility (county attorney civil practice); modern analogs Model Rules 1.7 and 1.11

See also

• KBA Ethics Op. E-71: Commonwealth's Attorney Representing Public Utilities
• KBA Ethics Op. E-75: County Attorney Representing a Landowner in Condemnation
• KBA Ethics Op. E-37: County Attorney Partner Before the Zoning Commission

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-043.pdf

Original opinion text

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

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Ethics Opinion KBA E-43
Issued: January 1971

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 an elected county attorney represent an employer in connection with a
labor dispute?

Answer:

Yes.
OPINION

Inasmuch as the Commonwealth of Kentucky does not prohibit the civil practice of
law unrelated to the criminal practice by county attorneys, there is no inhibition, ethical or
otherwise, against the county attorney representing any party to civil litigation unconnected
with criminal litigation, be it the representation of a labor union or an employer.

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.