When a firm member is the city attorney, may the firm represent private clients before the city council, its boards, or the municipal court?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether a law firm, or one of its members, could represent and appear for private clients before the city council, before boards and commissions appointed by the council, and in municipal court, when one of the firm's members was the city attorney, who served as legal adviser to the council and those boards and was in effect the city's prosecutor in municipal court.

The committee held such representation a clear violation of Canon 6 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, which prohibits representing conflicting interests. It said it was quite apparent that the city attorney himself could not so represent clients before the council, the boards and commissions, or the municipal court. It then applied the imputation principle: if acts performed by one member of a firm would violate the canons, those acts cannot be performed by his partners without likewise constituting unprofessional conduct, citing ABA Opinion No. 33.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1959, decades before Oklahoma replaced its original Rules of Professional Conduct (patterned on the ABA Canons of Professional Ethics) with the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (adopted 1988) and the later Ethics 2000 revisions. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis, including how conflicts are imputed within a firm. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could the city attorney himself appear for private clients before the city council or municipal court?

A: No. The committee said it was quite apparent he could not, because the representation would conflict with his duties as legal adviser to the council and as the city's prosecutor.

Q: Could the city attorney's partners appear instead?

A: No. The committee applied imputation: acts that would violate the canons if done by one firm member cannot be done by his partners without likewise being unprofessional conduct.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Canon 6 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted in Oklahoma, which prohibits representing conflicting interests, and the imputation principle that one partner's disqualifying conduct extends to the whole firm. It relied on ABA Opinion No. 33. The opinion predates the Model Rules and made no Model Rule citation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Canon 6 (ABA Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted by the Oklahoma Bar): prohibits representing conflicting interests.

Other opinions cited:

• ABA Formal Opinion No. 33: acts that would be unprofessional for one firm member are likewise unprofessional for his partners.

See also

• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 199: Assistant county attorney representing a beer-license applicant
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 32: City attorney's firm as special prosecutor with civil claims

Source

• Landing page: https://www.okbar.org/ethics/ethics-opinion-no-200/

Original opinion text

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

Adopted November 2, 1959

The Central Committee of the Oklahoma Bar Association has submitted to its Legal Ethics Committee the following inquiry:

INQUIRY

Is it proper for a law firm, or a member of a firm, to represent and appear on behalf of clients before the City Council or before Boards and Commissions appointed by the City Council and in Municipal Court when one of the members of the firm is the City Attorney and has the duty of legal adviser to the Council, other Boards and Commissions appointed by the Council, and is in effect the prosecutor for the city before the Municipal Court?

OPINION

The Committee is of the opinion that such representation constitutes a clear violation of Canon 6 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, which prohibits the representation of conflicting interests. It is believed to be quite apparent that the City Attorney could not so represent clients before the Council and before such Boards and Commissions or before the Municipal Court. If acts performed by one member of a firm of attorneys would violate the canons of professional ethics, such acts cannot be performed by his partners without likewise constituting unprofessional conduct. (See Opinion No. 33, Opinions of the Committee on Professional Ethics and Grievances of the American Bar Association).