Link to original WordPerfect Document
94 N.J.L.J. 801
September 2, 1971
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS
Appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court
Conflict of Interest -
Legal Services Organization
Defending Action Instituted by Board Member
A county legal services corporation has asked for our opinion
with respect to certain circumstances which arise during the course
of its work.
The organization is a nonprofit corporation whose
direction is vested in a board of directors. Members of the
board control the general policy of the project, including
determination of eligibility standards and determination of
the type of services to be rendered. Members may, on occasion,
determine the eligibility of specific clients by name and may
determine the propriety of the project's furnishing specific
types of service to named clients.
No member of the board has access to any client's file.
In determining the services to be rendered in general, or to
particular clients, the board merely sets general policy
guidelines. It may not control the actual handling of a case,
dictate strategy or otherwise direct the attorney in the
handling of a case. Questions of this nature are passed upon
by the project administrator.
The project operates on a county-wide basis. It does a
substantial amount of matrimonial, consumer and landlord and
tenant litigation, which are also fields for specialization by
the private bar. It is thus inevitable that from time to time
attorneys employed by the project will be called upon to
defend actions instituted either by board members, or by as
associates in firms in which board members are employed.
The following questions are posed.
1. May project attorneys defend an action instituted by a
partner in a firm in which one of the board members is an
2. May project attorneys defend an action instituted on behalf
of the same firm by another attorney who is an associate of the
firm? It is noted that pleadings are signed on behalf of the firm
by the board member.
3. Would the size of the firm make any difference?
4. Since membership on the board changes from time to time,
how long after a board member resigns may project attorneys defend
actions instituted by the board member or by the firm of which he
is an associate or partner?
The answer to the first three questions must be in the
negative. It is clear that the corporation may not defend a matter
in which a board member represents the plaintiff. Canons of
Professional Ethics, Canon 6 forbids a representation of
conflicting interests. It is the obligation of each attorney to
represent his client with undivided fidelity and not divulge his
secrets or confidences. No matter how removed the attorney-board
member may be from the actual handling of the corporation's cases,
he is nevertheless a member of the board and responsible for the
proper functioning of the organization. In such circumstances a
corporation cannot represent a client whose interest is totally
opposed to that of the attorney-board member's client.
We have said on many occasions that the acts of the attorney
are also those of his partners and associates. The size of the law
firm would have no bearing on this matter.
As to the defense of actions brought by former board members,
there can be no hard and fast rule. It is assumed that the
attorney-board member on termination of his membership on the board
has severed all connection with the organization. After the lapse
of a reasonable time, the length of which may vary depending on how
closely the attorney has been associated in the public's mind with
the organization, the corporation may defend actions instituted by
the former board member.
* * *
This archive is a service of
Rutgers University School of Law - Camden