WSBA 1990

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

Short answer: The committee was of the opinion that issuing a temporary restraining order is 'substantial participation,' so under RPC 1.12(a) and (c) the partners may take the representation only after disclosure to and consent from all parties.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1990. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1990
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
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 Not binding precedent.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

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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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

Source

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.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1990 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.