Can I run seminars for, and take client referrals from, a business owned by the probate judge I regularly appear before?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney asked whether the attorney may enter a professional relationship with a non-legal organization owned by a probate judge before whom the attorney appears in the practice of law. Specifically, the attorney may be interested in conducting legal seminars for the non-legal organization, and asked whether it would be an ethical violation to conduct the seminars and receive client referrals from the organization.

The panel said Rule 3.5 ("Impartiality and Decorum of the Tribunal") applies, providing that a lawyer shall not (a) seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror, or other official by means prohibited by law; (b) communicate ex parte with such a person except as permitted by law; or (c) engage in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal. The panel added that Rule 8.4(e) ("Misconduct") provides that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official.

The panel was of the opinion that the attorney in the situation described does not violate any Rules of Professional Conduct as long as the attorney complies with the rules cited. The panel declined to render any advice regarding the judge's conduct, because such conduct is governed by the Judicial Code of Ethics.

In practice

Under this opinion, a lawyer's business relationship with an organization owned by a judge the lawyer appears before is not itself a violation, provided the lawyer stays within Rule 3.5 (no prohibited attempts to influence the judge, no improper ex parte contact, no disruption) and Rule 8.4(e) (no stating or implying an ability to influence a government official improperly). The opinion addresses only the lawyer's obligations and expressly leaves the judge's conduct to the Judicial Code of Ethics.

Common questions

Q: Is it an ethics violation to do business with a company owned by the judge I appear before?

A: Per the opinion, the attorney does not violate any Rules of Professional Conduct as long as the attorney complies with Rule 3.5 and Rule 8.4(e).

Q: Which rules constrain this arrangement?

A: Per the opinion, Rule 3.5 (not seeking to influence the judge by prohibited means, not communicating ex parte except as permitted, not disrupting the tribunal) and Rule 8.4(e) (not stating or implying an ability to influence a government official improperly).

Q: Does the panel address whether the judge may own the business?

A: Per the opinion, no; the panel declined to render advice on the judge's conduct because it is governed by the Judicial Code of Ethics.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rhode Island Rule 3.5 (impartiality and decorum of the tribunal) and Rule 8.4(e) (misconduct), corresponding to Model Rules 3.5 and 8.4. The panel read compliance with Rule 3.5's prohibitions on improper influence, ex parte contact, and disruption, together with Rule 8.4(e)'s bar on claiming improper influence, as sufficient to keep the lawyer's arrangement within the rules.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 3.5 (impartiality and decorum of the tribunal), MR 8.4 (misconduct)
• RI RPC 3.5(a)-(c); RI RPC 8.4(e)

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 92-56: A Hearing Officer and Her Attorney-Spouse
• RI EAP Op. 92-55: Law-Related Seminars and Solicitation

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992 (Opinion 92-62), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 3.5 and 8.4 as originally adopted. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which amended Rules 3.5 and 8.4. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

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%2092-62.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

Ethics Advisory Panel
Opinion #92-62, Request #288
September 16, 1992

An attorney seeks Panel advice as to whether the attorney may enter a professional relationship with a non-legal organization which is owned by a probate judge. The attorney appears before the same probate judge in the practice of law. Specifically, the attorney may be interested in conducting legal seminars for the non-legal organization. The attorney asks whether it is an ethical violation for the attorney to conduct seminars and receive client referrals from the organization.

Rule 3.5 entitled "Impartiality and Decorum of the Tribunal" is applicable to this inquiry. The rule states that:

A lawyer shall not:

(a) seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror or other official by means prohibited by law;

(b) communicate ex parte with such a person except as permitted by law; or

(c) engage in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal.

In addition, Rule 8.4(e) entitled "Misconduct" provides that "It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official." The Panel is of the opinion that the attorney in this situation described does not violate any Rules of Professional Conduct as long as the attorney complies with the Rules cited above.

The Panel declines to render any advice with regard to the judge's conduct because such conduct is governed by the Judicial Code of Ethics.