I was a law clerk for the Workers' Compensation Court and now handle comp cases at a firm. Is there a waiting period before I can appear before that court's appellate division?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney was formerly a law clerk assigned to assist the appellate division of the Workers' Compensation Court and is now employed in a law firm handling workers' compensation matters. The attorney asked whether a time restriction would limit the attorney's ability to appear before the appellate division of the Workers' Compensation Court.

The panel explained that Rule 1.11 imposes a "one year abstention rule" but does not apply to members of the law-clerk pool; former clerks are permitted to practice before the trial courts at any time following their clerkships. The inquiring attorney may appear before the appellate division as long as the attorney did not participate personally and substantially as a law clerk in connection with a matter that the law firm was involved with.

The panel added that if the attorney did participate personally and substantially as a law clerk in a matter, then the entire law firm is disqualified unless the attorney does not participate in the matter and written notice is given to the proper tribunal, citing Rule 1.12.

In practice

Under this opinion, a former law clerk to the Workers' Compensation Court faces no fixed waiting period drawn from Rule 1.11's one-year rule before appearing before the court's appellate division. The opinion holds the limit is matter-specific: the former clerk may appear unless he or she participated personally and substantially in that matter as a clerk, and where such participation occurred, the whole firm is disqualified unless the clerk is screened from the matter and written notice is given to the tribunal under Rule 1.12.

Common questions

Q: Is there a one-year waiting period before a former Workers' Comp Court clerk can appear before it?

A: Per the opinion, no; Rule 1.11's one-year abstention rule does not apply to the law-clerk pool, and former clerks may practice before the trial courts at any time after their clerkships.

Q: When is a former clerk barred from a particular case?

A: Per the opinion, when the clerk participated personally and substantially in that matter as a clerk; absent such participation, the clerk may appear before the appellate division.

Q: What happens to the clerk's firm if the clerk did work on the matter?

A: Per the opinion, the entire law firm is disqualified unless the former clerk does not participate in the matter and written notice is given to the proper tribunal, per Rule 1.12.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rhode Island Rules 1.11 (successive government and private employment) and 1.12 (former judge, arbitrator, mediator, or other third-party neutral, and their clerks), corresponding to the same-numbered Model Rules. The panel read Rule 1.11's one-year rule as inapplicable to the clerk pool and treated Rule 1.12's personal-and-substantial-participation standard, with screening and written notice, as the governing limit on a former clerk and the clerk's firm.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.11 (successive government and private employment)
• MR 1.12 (former judge, arbitrator, or law clerk; imputation and screening)
• RI RPC 1.11, 1.12

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 91-70: Former Law Clerk May Not Take a Matter Pending Before the Judge
• RI EAP Op. 91-08: Panel Declines to Interpret the Law-Clerk Pool Manual

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992 (Opinion 92-75, issued September 16, 1992), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 1.11 and 1.12 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 renumbered and amended the government-employment and former-adjudicator rules. 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%2092-75.pdf

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
Opinion 92-75, Request #303
Issued September 16, 1992

The inquiring attorney was formerly a law clerk, assigned to assist the appellate division of the Workers' Compensation Court. The attorney is presently employed in a law firm and is handling workers' compensation matters. The attorney asks whether there is a time restriction which would limit the attorney's ability to appear before the appellate division of the Workers' Compensation Court.

Rule 1.11 imposes a "one year abstention rule," but does not apply to the members of the law clerk pool. Former clerks are permitted to practice before the trial courts at any time following their clerkships. The inquiring attorney may appear before the appellate division as long as the attorney did not participate personally and substantially as a law clerk in connection with a matter that the law firm was involved with. Furthermore, if the attorney has participated personally and substantially as a law clerk in a matter, then the entire law firm is disqualified unless the attorney does not participate in the matter and written notice is given to the proper tribunal. (See, Rule 1.12)