I'm a full-time municipal zoning official (not a lawyer role) who also runs a part-time solo land-use practice. Can I put 'J.D.' on town paperwork, keep my private practice in that same town, share office space with a real estate developer who deals with me officially, and represent that developer's real estate matters in other towns?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney worked as a full-time municipal zoning official, a position that does not require a law degree and is not itself a lawyer position, while separately maintaining a part-time solo law practice focused on land use, permitting, and zoning matters; the attorney did not accept real estate matters relating to the municipality. A real estate developer with an office in the municipality, and which interacts with the attorney in the attorney's official zoning capacity, offered to share office space and asked the attorney to handle some of its real estate matters in other communities. The attorney asked the panel whether the Rules permit using "J.D." on the municipality's official documents, maintaining the private practice in that municipality, sharing office space with the developer, and representing the developer on real estate matters elsewhere.

The panel found nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct barring the use of "J.D." on municipal correspondence, and, because the attorney did not accept real estate matters relating to the municipality, found no conflicts-of-interest problem with maintaining the private practice there, while noting the municipality's own rules, regulations, and policies (governing outside employment and official designations) might separately limit the conduct, a question outside the panel's jurisdiction. On office sharing, the panel cited its own prior Opinion 97-05 for the proposition that lawyers may share office space with non-lawyers but must make the separate nature of the businesses clear to the public and take measures to protect client confidences; since the attorney had not described the arrangement's details, the panel directed attention to the attorney's obligations under Rule 1.6 (confidentiality), Rules 1.7 and 1.8 (conflicts of interest), Rule 1.11 (conflicts for government officers and employees), Rule 5.4 (professional independence), and Rule 7 (communications and advertising). The panel concluded the Rules permit all four proposed activities, while advising the attorney to separately consult the State Ethics Code.

In practice

On these facts, the panel permitted the full-time municipal zoning official to use "J.D." on municipal documents, maintain a part-time private practice that excluded the municipality's real estate matters, share office space with a developer who dealt with the official, and represent that developer on real estate matters in other communities. The opinion also identified confidentiality, conflicts, independence, and advertising rules relevant to the arrangement; it did not address the State Ethics Code or municipal employment rules.

Common questions

Q: Can I use "J.D." on my government employer's official paperwork even though my government job isn't a lawyer position?

A: Yes, according to this opinion; the Rules of Professional Conduct do not prohibit it, though the panel notes the employer's own policies might separately address official designations.

Q: Can I keep a private law practice in the same town where I work as a government official?

A: Yes, on these facts, because the attorney does not accept real estate matters relating to the municipality; the panel found no Rule conflicts-of-interest problem, while noting municipal rules on outside employment are a separate question outside the panel's jurisdiction.

Q: Can I share office space with a business that interacts with me in my official government role, and represent that business elsewhere?

A: Yes, according to the opinion, citing the panel's own prior Opinion 97-05 permitting lawyer/non-lawyer office sharing so long as the businesses' separateness is made clear to the public and client confidences are protected; the panel directed the attorney's attention to Rules 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.11, 5.4, and 7 given that the arrangement's details were not described.

Q: Does this opinion clear me under my town's own ethics rules too?

A: No. The panel's guidance is restricted to the Rules of Professional Conduct and does not extend to the State Ethics Code or the municipality's own rules, regulations, or policies, which the attorney must separately consult.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rhode Island Rule 1.6 (confidentiality), Rules 1.7 and 1.8 (conflicts of interest), Rule 1.11 (special conflicts of interest for government officers and employees), Rule 5.4 (professional independence of a lawyer), and Rule 7 (communications about a lawyer's services and advertising), all tracking the corresponding Model Rules, to a lawyer's part-time private practice and office-sharing arrangement alongside full-time, non-legal government employment. It relies on the panel's own prior Opinion 97-05 (1997) for the office-sharing disclosure and confidentiality standard.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.6 (confidentiality of information)
• MR 1.7, MR 1.8 (conflicts of interest; business transactions and related rules)
• MR 1.11 (special conflicts of interest for government officers and employees)
• MR 5.4 (professional independence of a lawyer)
• MR 7 (communications about a lawyer's services and advertising, generally)

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 97-05 (1997): lawyers sharing office space with non-lawyers must make the separate nature of the businesses clear and protect client confidences

See also

• Arizona Bar Op. 97-08: Business Activities; Accountants; Sharing Office Space
• RI EAP Op. 2009-01: Former Part-Time Municipal Assistant Solicitor May Represent Private Clients Against the Municipality

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%202010-02.pdf

Original opinion text

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

Final

Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel Opinion No. 2010-02 Request No. No. 973
Issued May 13, 2010

FACTS

The inquiring attorney is employed as a full-time zoning official by a municipality. The position does not require a law degree, and he/she is not employed as an attorney. In addition to his/her municipal job, the inquiring attorney has a part-time solo law practice. The focus of the law practice is on land use, permitting, and zoning matters. The inquiring attorney does not accept real estate matters relating to the municipality.

A real estate developer with an office located in the municipality has offered the inquiring attorney an opportunity to share office space at its location. The developer owns property in the municipality, and interacts with the inquiring attorney in his/her official capacity. The developer would like the inquiring attorney to handle some real estate maters on its behalf in other communities.

ISSUE PRESENTED

The inquiring attorney asks whether the Rules of Professional Conduct permit him/her to (1) include the letters "J.D." on the municipality's official correspondence and documents; (2) establish a private law practice in the municipality; (3) share office space with a real estate developer who interacts with the inquiring attorney in his/her official capacity; and (4) represent the real estate developer on real estate matters in other communities.

OPINION

The Panel responds to each question in the affirmative.

REASONING

The Rules of Professional Conduct do not prohibit the inquiring attorney from using the letters "J.D." on the municipality's official correspondence and documents. Additionally, inasmuch as the inquiring attorney has stated that he/she does not accept real estate matters related to the municipality, the inquiring attorney does not appear to run afoul of the conflicts-of-interests provisions of the Rules by establishing a law practice in the municipality that employs him/her. The municipality's rules, regulations, and policies may otherwise limit the conduct of its officials and employees, including Final Op. 2010-02 Page 2 of 2

outside part-time employment and designations on its official correspondence and documents. Whether the municipality permits the conduct about which the inquiring attorney inquires is outside the Panel's jurisdiction.

The inquiring attorney next asks whether he/she may share office space for his/her law office with a real estate developer who interacts with the inquiring attorney in his/her capacity as a zoning official. The inquiring attorney also asks whether he/she is permitted to provide legal services for the real estate developer. Both of these proposals are permitted under the Rules.

Lawyers may share office space with non-lawyers, but lawyers must make the separate nature of the businesses clear to the public, and must take measures to protect client confidences. Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 97-05 (1997). The inquiring attorney has not included details of the office-sharing arrangement in this inquiry. The Panel directs the inquiring attorney's attention to his/her obligations pursuant to Rules 1.6 (confidentiality), Rules 1.7 and 1.8 (conflicts of interest), Rule 1.11 (conflicts of interest for government officers and employees), Rule 5.4 (professional independence), and Rule 7 (communications about lawyer's services and advertising).

The Panel concludes that the Rules of Professional Conduct permit the inquiring attorney to use "J.D." on municipal correspondence and documents, establish a private law practice in the municipality, share office space with the real estate developer, and represent the real estate developer on real estate matters in other communities. The Panel further advises the inquiring attorney to consult the State Ethics Code to ascertain whether the conduct about which he/she has inquired is governed by the Code.

The Panel's guidance is restricted to interpretations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and does not extend to issues under the State Ethics Code or any other rules, regulations or laws that may have a bearing on the issues raised by this inquiry.