What outside criminal and civil matters may a part-time city attorney and his partners handle in courts and agencies other than the city's municipal court?

Plain-English summary

A newly appointed part-time city attorney of Tampa, whose several assistants were also part-time, posed three questions. The opinion was stated by committee member The Honorable Hugh M. Taylor.

On the first question, whether the city attorney and staff (other than the assistant who prosecutes in municipal court, and his partners and associates) could defend criminal cases in any state or federal court in Florida, the committee could not give a clear-cut answer. Two members would answer yes for staff not handling municipal criminal matters; one member would have all staff and their partners refrain from any criminal case in any court; and one member thought any disqualification might be limited to the same community or locality. On the second question, the committee unanimously agreed that the city attorney and staff could represent clients in civil actions and before administrative bodies where another municipality, a county (including the city's own county), or the State of Florida or its agencies is an adverse party or forum, finding none of those activities improper. On the third question, the committee was unanimous that representing clients before state or federal agencies, boards, or commissions in criminal or quasi-criminal matters not involving the municipality was entirely proper, with one member excepting appearances before the Parole Commission or the Pardon Board on behalf of a convicted person.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1963, before The Florida Bar's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. The opinion applied former Canon 6 of the Canons of Professional Ethics; conflicts of interest are now addressed by Rule 4-1.7 and the conduct of government lawyers by Rule 4-1.11 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar (Model Rules 1.7 and 1.11). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current rules before relying on any specific requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could the part-time city attorney's firm defend criminal cases in other state and federal courts?

A: The committee could not give a clear-cut answer. Views ranged from yes for staff outside the municipal-prosecution role, to a complete bar, to a bar limited to the same locality.

Q: Could the firm sue or oppose other governments in civil matters?

A: Yes, unanimously. The committee found nothing improper in representing clients in civil matters adverse to another municipality, a county (including the city's own), or the State of Florida and its agencies.

Q: Could the firm handle outside criminal or quasi-criminal agency matters not involving the city?

A: Yes. The committee was unanimous that this was entirely proper, with one member excepting appearances before the Parole Commission or Pardon Board for a convicted person.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied former Canon 6 (conflicting interests) of the Canons of Professional Ethics. Conflicts are now governed by Rule 4-1.7, and the situation of government lawyers by Rule 4-1.11, of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar (Model Rules 1.7 and 1.11). The analysis distinguishes matters that pit the lawyer against his own municipal employer (or implicate his prosecutorial role) from outside matters that do not involve the city.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Canon 6 [Canons of Professional Ethics; conflicting interests; see current Rules 4-1.7, 4-1.11]

See also

• FL Bar Ethics Op. 67-52: County Attorney Defending a Criminal Case in the County
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 65-17: County Prosecutor in Civil Suits Against the County
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 63-31: Assistant City Attorney Prosecuting a Partner's Former Client

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-63-24/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2017/04/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-63-24.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 63-24
October 23, 1963
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
A "part-time" city attorney and his assistants may accept various enumerated criminal and civil cases in forums other than the municipal court of the city.
Canon: 6
The Honorable Hugh M. Taylor, a member of the committee, stated the opinion of the committee:
A member of The Florida Bar has advised us that he has been appointed as a city attorney of Tampa; that he has several assistants all of whom and himself are on a "part-time" basis; and he requests the opinion of the Committee on Professional Ethics with respect to three questions which we answer as follows:

1. The first question is:
   One Assistant City Attorney will be solely responsible for prosecution of cases in the Municipal Court, assisting the City police officer who has made the charge. Excepting the Assistant who so prosecutes, and his partners and associates, can the City Attorney, any other Assistant City Attorney, or any partner or associate of such attorneys, ethically defend criminal cases in any state or federal court in the State of Florida?
   Two members of the Committee would answer this question in the affirmative. That is, that the inquiring member and those members of his staff not handling criminal matters in municipal court may properly and ethically defend criminal cases in any state or federal court in Florida. One member of the Committee feels that he and all members of his staff and their partners and associates should refrain from appearing in any criminal case in any court. One member of the Committee is inclined to the view that the disqualification to act in other criminal cases may be limited to the same community or locality. We are thus unable to give a clear-cut answer to this question. A majority of the Committee does not afford either a clear-cut affirmative or negative answer to the question.
2. The second question is as follows:
   Can the City Attorney, any Assistant City Attorney, or any partner or associate of such attorneys, ethically represent clients in civil actions and suits, or before administrative commissioners, boards etc., in civil matters when:
   (a) another municipality is involved as an adverse party;
   (b) the matter is before an agency of another municipality;
   (c) a county, including the one in which the city is located, is involved as an adverse party;
   (d) the matter is before a county commission or agency, including the County Commission and agencies of the county in which the city is located;
   (e) the State of Florida, or its agencies, are involved as an adverse party; and
   (f) the matter is before an agency of the State of Florida.
   All members of the Committee agree this should be answered in the affirmative in its entirety and that none of the suggested activities are in any way improper when engaged in by him or any members of his staff.
3. The third question is as follows:
   Can the City Attorney, any Assistant City Attorney, or any partner or associate of such attorneys, ethically represent clients before state or federal agencies, boards or commissions in connection with criminal or quasi-criminal matters which do not involve the municipality in any way?
   The Committee is unanimous in answering this question in the affirmative and holding that the suggested activities are entirely proper with the exception that one member of the Committee feels that neither the inquiring lawyer nor any member of his staff should appear before the Parole Commission or the Pardon Board on behalf of a person convicted of a crime.