Link to original WordPerfect Document

                                         86 N.J.L.J. 734
                                        December 26, 1963

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

Appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court


OPINION 18

Conflict of Interest
Municipal Attorneys

    Two attorneys who are counsel to a city housing authority inquire whether it is proper for them to appear on behalf of a private client before the board of adjustment, the planning board, or other agencies of the same city.
    It is the opinion of the Committee that an attorney who is counsel to a city housing authority should not appear before the city board of adjustment, planning board, or other city agencies on behalf of a private client. An attorney representing a city housing authority has as his client the entire municipality. Hence, he should avoid being put in the position where his duty to a private client requires him to ask for relief or a favor from the municipality or any of its agencies on behalf of such private client. See Opinions 4 and 5 of this Committee, 86 N.J.L.J. 357, 361 (1963).

* * *


This archive is a service of Rutgers University School of Law - Camden