Link to original WordPerfect Document

                                         96 N.J.L.J. 1325
                                         November 13, 1973


ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

Appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court

OPINION 268

Assistant County Counsel
Municipal and Juvenile Court Practice

    As inquiry has been made as to whether an assistant county counsel or any member or an associate of his firm may appear in a municipal court in his county to represent a defendant charged with a non-indictable offense. He calls attention to the fact that in our Opinion 106, 90 N.J.L.J. 497 (1967), we did not refer to other municipal court matters where the county prosecutor is not involved, although he does concede that the language of our opinion is quite broad.
    Specifically, he asks the following four questions:
    1.    Can I or any member or associate of my firm represent in a municipal court in the county a defendant who is charged with a non- indictable offense?

    2.    Can I or any member or associate of my firm represent in municipal court in the county a defendant who is charged with a motor vehicle violation?

    3.    Can I or any member or associate of my firm represent in a municipal court in the county a defendant charged with a violation of a municipal ordinance?

    4.    Can I or any member or associate of my firm represent a defendant in a juvenile delinquency proceeding before the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court where the County Prosecutor is not involved?

He tells us that in his opinion, the county prosecutor's office is not involved and accordingly, the language about his being part of the official family of the county would not seem to be applicable.
    All the above questions are adequately answered by our Opinion 106, supra and Rules 1:16-3, 4 and 6. Now we feel it is important to repeat that in our Opinion 106, above mentioned, we specifically said:
        The county attorney represents all of the people of the county in matters affecting it. Thus, his conduct must be such as to prevent any inference arising that he is using his public office for private gain (see this Committee's Opinion 70, 88, N.J.L.J. 761 (1965)). This rule generally applies with equal force to attorneys representing municipalities, counties or the State. See Drinker, Legal Ethics 118, 119." (1963).

    For all the reasons stated above, we feel that it would be improper for the inquirer or any member or associate of his firm to represent a private client in the instances cited in this inquiry.

* * *

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