Could Vermont Housing Finance Agency counsel speak directly with represented developers under a blanket authorization from their lawyers?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1980. Ask about yours and see what the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Counsel for the Vermont Housing Finance Agency wanted regular direct contact with developers seeking financing, even though the developers had their own lawyers. The proposed arrangement involved written blanket authorization from each developer's counsel, and the agency said authorization would not be a financing condition.
The committee applied former DR 7-104, which barred a lawyer from communicating about a represented matter with a person known to have counsel unless that counsel consented or law authorized contact. It concluded that agency counsel could deal directly with developers under the proposed authorization.
The committee made revocability a condition of its answer. A developer's lawyer could withdraw authorization at any time; after revocation, DR 7-104 would bar further direct contact without renewed consent.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1980 under Vermont's former Code of Professional Responsibility. The Vermont Supreme Court's rules history says the Rules of Professional Conduct replaced the Code and applied to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999; the court later made comprehensive amendments in 2009. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could the developer's counsel grant continuing permission for direct contact?
A: Yes. The committee accepted blanket authorization on the stated facts.
Q: What happened if that lawyer withdrew permission?
A: The committee said direct contact had to stop until renewed consent was obtained.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied former Code DR 7-104 and discussed Canon 9's concern with the appearance of impropriety. Its conclusion depended on authorization from the represented developers' counsel.
Citations and references
Vermont Code of Professional Responsibility:
- DR 7-104, Canon 9
Other opinions cited:
- ABA Opinions 55, 66, 177, and 197, cited collectively in the discussion of contact with represented persons.
See also
- Vermont Ethics Op. 81-07: Town attorney firm's adverse matters
- Vermont Ethics Op. 81-08: Opposing state agencies and the Attorney General
Source
- Landing page: VBA conflict of interest opinions
- Original PDF: Vermont Advisory Opinion 80-05
- Rules history: Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct, “These rules apply to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999.”
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1980. 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