Can a law firm be paid to represent a public education district when one of the firm's lawyers sits on that district's board?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1982. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Opinion E-82-15 addressed whether a law firm may perform services for compensation for a local VTAE district when a member of the firm serves on the district's board of directors, where full disclosure of the relationship is made to the board and the firm member who is a director does not participate in the decision to retain the firm. The committee answered yes, under stated conditions.
The committee called attention to SCR 20.23, 20.24, 20.46, and 20.48 as applicable, and noted that the firm member on the board must comply not only with the Code but also with Wis. Stat. secs. 19.45 and 946.13 (1979-80). It concluded the firm may perform the services for compensation provided that: (1) the firm members, including the member on the board, make full disclosure to the VTAE board; (2) that firm member abstains from any part in the decision to retain the firm; and (3) the firm's performance of its duties to the board will in no way be improperly affected by the fact that a firm member is also a board member.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1982, before Wisconsin's July 1, 2007 adoption of the revised Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys (the state's Ethics 2000 update), and it applies the former Code (SCR 20.23, 20.24, 20.46, 20.48). Conflicts of interest are now governed by SCR 20:1.7 / Model Rule 1.7. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here.
Common questions
Q: Could a firm be paid to represent a public board when one of its lawyers sat on that board?
A: Yes, under E-82-15, subject to conditions: full disclosure to the board, the member-director abstaining from the hiring decision, and the firm's duties being unaffected by the dual role.
Q: What additional law applied to the lawyer who sat on the board?
A: The committee noted the board-member lawyer also had to comply with Wis. Stat. secs. 19.45 and 946.13, beyond the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Background and rules framework
The opinion interpreted the former Code's conflict and judgment provisions (SCR 20.23, 20.24, 20.46, 20.48) together with the public-official conflict statutes (Wis. Stat. secs. 19.45, 946.13). Conflicts of interest are now governed by SCR 20:1.7 / Model Rule 1.7.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Wis. SCR 20.23, 20.24, 20.46, 20.48 / Model Rule 1.7 (conflicts and independent judgment) (former Code provisions)
Statutes:
- Wis. Stat. sec. 19.45 (1979-80) (standards of conduct for public officials)
- Wis. Stat. sec. 946.13 (1979-80) (private interest in a public contract)
See also
- WI Ethics Op. E-84-16: District Attorney Serving on a Community Board of Directors
- WI Ethics Op. E-84-12: Corporate Counsel Serving on a Board of Directors
- WI Ethics Op. E-86-16: Lawyer-Director of an Insurer Whose Firm Sues the Insurer
Source
- Landing page: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/pages/formal-opinions.aspx
- Original PDF: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/E-82-15.pdf
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1982 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.