Could a Vermont firm lobby the legislature for clients while a firm shareholder served as a legislator?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2002. Ask about yours and see what the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
One firm lawyer lobbied on specific legislative issues for clients while a director and shareholder of the firm became a legislator. The firm represented that the lawyer-legislator would neither review nor vote on bills on which it lobbied for clients. The committee assessed the resulting interests under Vermont Rules 1.7(b) and 1.10, House Rule 75, and the lawyer-legislator's public duties.
The committee said firm lobbying was permissible on those limited facts. It warned that participating in legislation that generated firm lobbying fees would raise House Rule 75 concerns, opposing a client's legislative position could create an unwaivable material limitation, and suggesting the firm could use its legislator to influence government would implicate Rule 8.4(e). It distinguished its earlier Opinion 82-5 under a superseded Code rule and declined to decide more broadly based lobbying arrangements.
In practice
Under this opinion, the favorable result depends on the legislator's complete nonparticipation in legislation on which a firm lawyer represents a client. The committee treated broader firm lobbying as a different factual question.
Common questions
Q: Could the lawyer-legislator vote on a bill that generated firm lobbying fees?
A: The opinion said participation on those facts would violate House Rule 75 and risk compromising the representative's oath.
Q: Did client consent cure a legislator working against the firm's lobbying client?
A: No. The committee described active opposition to a client's position on the same legislation as a material limitation that could not be waived in the situation it discussed.
Background and rules framework
The committee applied Vermont Rules 1.7(b), 1.10, 1.11, and 8.4(e), along with House Rule 75. It emphasized that its answer depended on a narrow lobbying practice and the legislator's stated nonparticipation.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct 1.7(b), 1.10, 1.11, and 8.4(e)
- Vermont House Rule 75, direct interest in a vote
Other opinions cited:
- Vermont Opinion 82-5, earlier lobbying conclusion under superseded DR 8-101(A)
- Arizona State Bar Formal Opinion 93-09, similar lawyer-legislator issue
See also
- Vermont Ethics Op. 91-05: Defender General independence
- Vermont Ethics Op. 99-09: State counsel and former clients
Source
- Landing page: Vermont Bar Association legislator opinions
- Original PDF: Opinion 02-03
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2002. Ezel checks the current Vermont 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