If I win a seat on the town council, may I still appear before the town's Probate and Municipal Courts and Planning and Zoning staff, and represent criminal clients in cases involving the town's police, during my term?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney, a solo practitioner, was contemplating running for town council in Town A. The attorney asked whether, as an elected official, he or she could appear before the Probate and Municipal Courts in Town A or contact the Planning and Zoning staff in Town A, and whether he or she could represent clients in criminal matters in Superior, District, Family, and AAD Courts where Town A's police department was involved.

The Panel answered no in either case. It set out Rule 1.11 ("Successive Government and Private Employment"), which prevents an attorney from exploiting public office for a private client's advantage, and quoted Rule 1.11(b), barring a lawyer who has been employed by a government office from representing a private client before that office for one year following the end of the employment. Although Rule 1.11 addresses only successive employment, the Panel reasoned that its rationale applies equally to concurrent government and private employment: if the representation is unacceptable after leaving government service, it follows that one may not undertake it while currently serving part time in government.

Citing the comment that Rule 1.11(b) is intended to prevent the appearance of impropriety when a lawyer later appears before a former government office, the Panel concluded that because the attorney would be barred from appearing before the Probate and Municipal Courts and the Planning and Zoning staff for one year after leaving municipal service, he or she could not appear before them during the council term. Likewise, the attorney could not represent clients in criminal matters in the named courts where Town A's police department was involved during the term and for one year after. The Panel referred the attorney to the State Ethics Commission and limited its guidance to the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996 (Opinion 96-13, issued July 11, 1996), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rule 1.11 as it stood at the time. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which substantially rewrote Rule 1.11. 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 or one-year period mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer on the town council still practice before the town's courts and zoning board?

A: The Panel said no during the term. Reading Rule 1.11's one-year post-service bar to apply by analogy to concurrent service, it barred appearances before the town's Probate and Municipal Courts and Planning and Zoning staff.

Q: Does the bar reach criminal cases involving the town's police?

A: Yes, on these facts. The Panel said the council member could not represent clients in criminal matters in the named courts where Town A's police department was involved, during the term and for one year after.

Q: Rule 1.11 is about former government lawyers. Why apply it to a sitting official?

A: The Panel applied the rule's rationale by analogy, reasoning that if a representation is barred for a year after leaving office, it cannot be permissible while still holding the office.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Rhode Island Rule of Professional Conduct 1.11 (successive government and private employment), the analog of Model Rule 1.11. The Panel extended the rule's appearance-of-impropriety rationale from successive to concurrent service, treating a sitting council member as barred from private appearances before the town's own courts and agencies.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.11 / RI RPC 1.11(b) (successive government and private employment; one-year bar)

See also

• RI EAP Opinion 91-63: a government lawyer may represent clients before other agencies if Rule 1.7 is met
• RI EAP Opinion 2016-02: a former city solicitor representing private clients before city boards

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%2096-13.pdf

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION 96-13 - REQUEST # 664
Issued - July 11, 1996

FACTS:

The inquiring attorney, a solo practitioner, is contemplating running for town council in Town A.

ISSUES PRESENTED:

May the inquiring attorney, while an elected official, appear before the Probate and Municipal Courts in Town A and/or contact the Planning and Zoning staff in Town A and; may the inquiring attorney, as an elected official, represent clients in criminal matters in Superior, District, Family and AAD Courts where Town A's police departments are involved?

OPINION:

No, in either case.

REASONING:

Rule 1.11 entitled "Successive Government and Private Employment" prevents an attorney from exploiting public office for the advantage of a private client. Rule 1.11(b) states:

Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Rule, a lawyer who has been employed by any government office or agency shall not represent a private client before that government office or agency for a period of one year following the termination of such employment.

Although Rule 1.11 addresses only successive employment, the Panel believes its rationale is equally applicable to concurrent government and private employment. If the representation is unacceptable after one has left government employment, then it would follow that one may not represent a client while currently employed in a part time capacity with the government.

As the comments to Rule 1.11 point out, paragraph (b) is intended to prevent the appearance of impropriety that necessarily occurs when a lawyer terminates employment with a government office or agency and then appears before that office or agency representing a private client. Because the inquiring attorney will be prohibited from appearing before the Probate and Municipal Courts as well as the Planning and Zoning staff for a period of one year following termination of municipal service, he/she may not appear before such court or department during his/her tenure on the Town Council. The inquiring attorney is also prohibited from representing clients in criminal matters in Superior, District, Family and AAD Courts if Town A's police department is involved during his/her tenure and for one year thereafter.

The Panel refers the inquiring attorney to the State Ethics Commission and its Rules pertaining to elected officials. 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.