|
NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATIONCommittee on
Professional Ethics Opinion #534 - 06/09/1981 (2-81)
Topic: Legal aid; staff attorney; private clients
Digest: Former Legal Aid staff attorney may represent persons
previously served by him under certain circumstances
Code: Canon 9; EC 1-4, 2-24, 2-25, 2-29; DR 9-101(B)
QUESTION
May a former staff attorney of a Legal Aid Society continue to
represent in private practice indigent persons whom he had served while
employed by the Society?
OPINION
If legal services corporations, including the various Legal Aid
Societies, were to be viewed as public agencies, the proscription
contained in DR 9-101(B) against accepting "private employment" in a
matter for which the lawyer had "substantial responsibility while he was
a public employee" would be dispositive of the question
posed. Strictly speaking, however, legal
services corporations are not public agencies. Although many are heavily
funded by public sources, they are nonetheless private, non-profit
corporations. Hence, the proscription of DR 9-101(B) cannot be deemed
dispositive.
Rather, in the present context, DR 9-101(B) should be seen as
providing an illustration of a general policy underlying much of Canon
9. It is a policy which may be seen to develop from the Code’s
expressed purpose to promote public confidence in our system of justice
and the various mechanisms, or agencies, which have been created to
serve that system. Where the public might reasonably perceive that such
agencies are being used for the personal advantage of staff attorneys,
consistent with the broad purposes of Canon 9, the attorneys have been
prohibited from undertaking various kinds of private employment. Thus,
for example, part-time public defenders have been prohibited from
representing in private practice persons whom they have found to be
ineligible for public assistance. N.Y. State 165 (1970); see also, N.Y.
State 506 (1979), N.Y. State 426 (1976) and N.Y. State 260 (1972). As we
explained in N.Y. State 165:
"[F]or a lawyer to accept compensation from a client who has
previously sought uncompensated public assistance from the same lawyer
would clearly undermine confidence in the integrity of the
profession."
In that case, the matter about which the accused sought to retain the
lawyer's services privately was identical to the matter about which he
had consul ted the public defender's office and the lawyer continued to
be employed, albeit part-time, by that office.
While a staff attorney of a Legal Aid Society is not a public
employee, we believe that his position vis-a-vis the indigents whom he
serves is more closely analogous to that of a public defender than that
of an attorney in private practice.
The Code itself expressly encourages all lawyers to support
organizations which render legal services to the indigent and, by
necessary implication, to avoid conduct which would unreasonably hinder
their efforts in that regard. See, e.g., EC 1-4, EC 2-24, EC 2-25 and EC
2-29; cf., N.Y. State 531 (1981), N. Y. State 485 (1978) and N.Y. State
456 (1976). It would seem somewhat anomalous to permit former staff
attorneys of a Legal Aid Society to undermine the very same institutions
which the Code urges all lawyers to support.
Since the absolute prohibition of DR 9-101(B) is not literally
applicable to the question posed, we are free to decide the matter in
light of the Code's evident purposes and with a view toward fulfilling
its design to provide legal services to all persons in need.
We believe that all legitimate interests can be accommodated by a
rule which prohibits former' staff attorneys of a Legal Aid Society from
undertaking to represent for a fee persons whom they have previously
served in connection with matters for which they had substantial
responsibility while employed by the Society, as long as those persons
remain eligible to receive such representation without charge. With
respect to new matters, former staff attorneys may furnish legal
services for a fee to persons whom they previously served through the
Society, provided such persons are fully informed of their eligibility
to receive those services without charge from another source. Whether
new matter or old, and regardless of eligibility for free assistance,
consistent with the Code's stated purpose to provide all persons in need
with legal counsel, former staff attorneys may continue to represent
those they have previously served through the Society without charge,
pro bono publico.
For the reasons stated, subject to the qualifications hereinabove set
forth, the question posed is answered in the affirmative.
Related Files
Opinion 534 (Adobe PDF File)
|