I own stock in a constable-services company and use it for my clients, passing on the cost. Does that violate the conduct rules?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney is a stockholder of a corporation that provides constable services. The attorney frequently uses the corporation's services during client representation and passes the costs of those services to the clients, and asks whether these actions violate the rules.

The panel concluded that Rule 1.7 (conflict of interest) governs. Rule 1.7(b) provides that a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities or the lawyer's own interests, unless the lawyer believes the representation will not be adversely affected and the client consents after consultation.

The panel pointed to the comments, which state that the lawyer's own interests should not be permitted to have an adverse effect on representation of a client, and that a lawyer may not allow related business interests to affect representation, for example by referring clients to an enterprise in which the lawyer has an undisclosed interest. Applying this, the panel advised that the attorney should make full disclosure to clients of the attorney's interest in the constable corporation. If the attorney wishes to refer clients to the constable services, the attorney must offer the clients a choice in constable services and should not pressure the clients into a decision.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rule 1.7 as originally adopted. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which restructured Rule 1.7 (and its treatment of a lawyer's business interests). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can I use my own constable company for my clients and bill them for it?

A: Per the opinion, only if the attorney fully discloses the interest and, when referring, offers the clients a choice of constable services without pressuring them.

Q: What does Rule 1.7's comment say about referring clients to my own business?

A: Per the opinion, a lawyer may not allow related business interests to affect representation, for example by referring clients to an enterprise in which the lawyer has an undisclosed interest.

Q: Is disclosure alone enough?

A: Per the opinion, disclosure is required, and the attorney must also offer the clients a choice in constable services and must not pressure them into a decision.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rhode Island Rule 1.7 (conflict of interest: general rule), corresponding to Model Rule 1.7. The panel relied on Rule 1.7(b) and its comment on a lawyer's related business interests, requiring disclosure of the lawyer's ownership interest and client choice, free of pressure, before the lawyer refers clients to the lawyer's own service enterprise.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.7 (conflict of interest: general rule)
• RI RPC 1.7(b)

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 92-37: Representing a Client Against the Attorney's Corporate Co-Owner
• RI EAP Op. 88-26: Mortgage-Brokerage Ownership, Title Work, and Office Sharing
• RI EAP Op. 92-30: Suing a Former Employer-Lawyer for a Client's Malpractice Claim

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2092-38.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
Opinion #92-38, Request #258
Issued July 23, 1992

An attorney seeks Panel advice with regard to the ethical propriety of the following conduct. The attorney is a stockholder of a corporation that provides constable services. The attorney frequently uses the corporation's services during the representation of clients and passes the costs of the services to the clients. The attorney inquires as to whether these actions violate the Rules of Professional Conduct. The Panel believes that Rule 1.7 "Conflict of Interest" governs this inquiry. Rule 1.7 states that:

(b) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities . . . or by the lawyer's own interests, unless:

(1) the lawyer . . . believes the representation will not be adversely affected; and

(2) the client consents after consultation.

The comments specifically address this inquiry. They state that "The lawyer's own interests should not be permitted to have adverse effect on representation of a client . . . . A lawyer may not allow related business interests to affect representation, for example, by referring clients to an enterprise in which the lawyer has an undisclosed interest." The attorney should make a full disclosure to the clients of the attorney's interest in the constable corporation. If the attorney wishes to refer clients to the constable services, the attorney must offer the clients a choice in constable services and should not pressure the clients into a decision.