Can the law partners of a part-time court commissioner represent parties in a matter where the commissioner signed a temporary order?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether lawyers in a law firm would be prohibited from representing parties in matters in which a member of the firm, a part-time court commissioner, had signed a temporary order. The committee was of the opinion that the issuing of temporary restraining orders is "substantial participation."

As a result, under RPC 1.12(a) and 1.12(c), such representation could only be undertaken after disclosure to and consent from all parties in the matter.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1990, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Is signing a temporary restraining order 'substantial participation' for conflict purposes?

A: Under this 1990 opinion, yes; the committee was of the opinion that issuing temporary restraining orders is substantial participation.

Q: Can the commissioner's partners still take the case?

A: Under RPC 1.12(a) and (c), only after disclosure to and consent from all parties in the matter.

Q: Whose conflict gets imputed to the firm?

A: The part-time commissioner's; because the commissioner substantially participated by signing the order, the disqualification reaches the firm absent the required disclosure and consent.

Background and rules framework

At the time of this opinion, Washington's RPC 1.12 governed former judges, arbitrators, and other adjudicative officers, barring later representation in a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as such an officer, and allowing it on disclosure and consent of all parties, the subject the Model Rules place in Rule 1.12. The committee classified signing a TRO as substantial participation triggering that rule.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 1.12 (former judge, arbitrator, or other third-party neutral)
• Washington RPC 1.12(a), 1.12(c)

See also

• WA Ethics Op. 1341: Part-Time Judge and Firm Conflicts

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=453

Original opinion text

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

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning whether lawyers in a law firm would be prohibited from representing parties in matters in which a member of the law firm who is a part time court commissioner had signed a temporary order. The Committee was of the opinion that the issuing of temporary restraining orders is "substantial participation" and therefore, pursuant to RPC 1.12(a) and 1.12(c), such representation could only be undertaken after disclosure and consent from all parties in the matter.