WSBA 1986

Did the WSBA committee revisit its opinion on employing a disbarred attorney?

Short answer: No. The committee declined to reconsider Formal Opinion 171, which addressed the employment of a disbarred attorney; this archived entry records that decision rather than restating the underlying rule.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1986. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.

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) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

This entry concerns the employment of a disbarred attorney, the subject of Formal Opinion 171. The committee was of the opinion, following a Rules of Professional Conduct Committee meeting, that it declined to reconsider Formal Opinion 171. The entry records the committee's decision not to revisit that opinion; it does not restate the underlying analysis.

Currency note

The Washington State Bar Association marks this opinion ARCHIVED, cautioning that archived advisory opinions are early ethics opinions that may be ambiguous, incomplete, redundant, refer to incorrect rule numbers, or are otherwise inconsistent with the current rules or law. This opinion was issued in 1986, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Does this opinion say whether a firm can employ a disbarred attorney?

A: Not directly. The committee declined to reconsider Formal Opinion 171, which addressed the employment of a disbarred attorney; 1061A records the decision not to revisit that opinion.

Q: What is the status of this opinion?

A: The WSBA marks it ARCHIVED, cautioning that archived advisory opinions may be ambiguous, incomplete, redundant, or otherwise inconsistent with the current rules or law.

Background and rules framework

The subject is the employment of a disbarred attorney, addressed in WSBA Formal Opinion 171. This entry records only that the committee declined to reconsider that opinion; the underlying rule analysis lives in Formal Opinion 171 and is not reproduced here.

Source

Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=172

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Advisory Opinion: 1061A
Year Issued: 1986
RPC(s): Formal Opinion 171
Subject: ARCHIVED - Employment of disbarred attorney

ARCHIVED - Disclaimer: Archived advisory opinions are early ethics opinions that may be ambiguous, incomplete, redundant, refer to incorrect rule numbers, or are otherwise inconsistent with the current rules or law.

As you know, having been in attendance at the Rules of Professional Conduct Committee meeting, the Committee declined to reconsider Formal Opinion 171.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1986 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.