Ezel / Ethics Opinions / SBAND

May a plaintiff’s lawyer interview unrepresented former county officials about a case against the county?

Short answer The committee said Rule 4.2 did not bar ex parte contact with unrepresented former county officials. It declined to approve particular questions without the facts needed to apply other rules, including privilege and Rule 4.3.
Bar
SBAND
Issued
September 19, 1996
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1996. Ask about yours and see what the current North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

How much weight this carries: Under North Dakota Rule for Lawyer Discipline 1.2(B), a lawyer who acts in good faith and in reasonable reliance on a written opinion of the association's ethics committee is not subject to sanction for the conduct the opinion addresses. Source.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A plaintiff suing a county for negligence wanted to question former county officials about reports and actions taken while they served. The requester did not describe the officials’ former titles or responsibilities.

The committee applied its earlier rule for former corporate employees to a government agency. It said Rule 4.2, as then written, did not prohibit contact with unrepresented former county officials. It cautioned that privileged communications and duties to unrepresented persons could still limit specific questions, which it did not decide.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996, before North Dakota's 2006 revisions to its Rules of Professional Conduct. The later North Dakota Opinion 06-05 states: “On August 1, 2006, material changes to N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.10(a) will take effect.” 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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, deadline, or requirement.

Common questions

Q: Did Rule 4.2 itself forbid these former-official interviews?

A: No. The committee said it did not reach unrepresented former county officials.

Q: Did the committee approve every proposed question?

A: No. It declined to decide that without applying all relevant rules to specific facts.

Background and rules framework

The opinion discusses North Dakota Rules 4.2, 4.3 in addressing the stated request.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • North Dakota Rule 4.2.
  • North Dakota Rule 4.3.

See also

Source

Original opinion text

Full opinion text unavailable from the official source; see the linked source above for the complete text.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1996. Ezel checks the current North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace