I have a part-time law practice and am a full-time police officer. Can I be the prosecuting officer and trial counsel for my town's police cases, and do the same for other towns, under Rule 1.7?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney maintained a part-time law practice and was also employed as a full-time police officer in Town A. The attorney asked whether he or she could serve as the prosecution officer for Town A and as trial counsel for Town A's police cases in District Court, and whether the attorney could enter the same arrangement with other municipalities besides the one employing him or her.

The Panel set out Rule 1.7(b), which bars a lawyer from representing a client if the representation may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected and the client consents after consultation.

Applying that rule, the Panel opined that the attorney may serve as trial counsel for Town A and other municipalities as long as the lawyer's own interests do not materially limit the lawyer's responsibilities to other clients. The Panel added that the attorney may not serve as a prosecution officer to a municipality where he or she represented a defendant in his or her law practice for the same or a related matter. The Panel declined to address the attorney's obligations to Town A as a full-time police officer, because that is not a matter governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct. It also cautioned the attorney regarding Rule 1.10 (imputed disqualification), which provides that while lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so by Rules 1.7, 1.8(c), 1.9, or 2.2.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1994 (Opinion 94-48, issued July 27, 1994), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 1.7 and 1.10 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 amended the conflict-of-interest and imputation rules. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 a part-time lawyer serve as a municipal prosecutor for the town where the lawyer also practices?

A: The Panel opined that the attorney may serve as trial counsel for the town and other municipalities, subject to Rule 1.7(b), so long as the lawyer's own interests do not materially limit duties to other clients.

Q: Is there any matter the lawyer flatly cannot prosecute?

A: Yes. The Panel opined the attorney may not serve as prosecution officer to a municipality where the lawyer represented a defendant in his or her law practice for the same or a related matter.

Q: Did the Panel address the lawyer's duties as a police officer?

A: No. The Panel declined to address the attorney's obligations to Town A as a full-time police officer, stating that is not governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct 1.7 (conflict of interest: general rule) and 1.10 (imputed disqualification), the analogs of Model Rules 1.7 and 1.10. Rule 1.7(b) governs material-limitation conflicts arising from the lawyer's other responsibilities or own interests; Rule 1.10 imputes an individual lawyer's conflicts to others in the same firm. The Panel applied the material-limitation branch and flagged the imputation rule for the lawyer's private-practice associations.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.7 / RI RPC 1.7(b) (conflict of interest: general rule; material-limitation conflicts)
• MR 1.10 / RI RPC 1.10 (imputed disqualification: general rule)

See also

• RI EAP Opinion 94-43: part-time state lawyer may keep a private client under Rule 1.7
• RI EAP Opinion 94-47: adverse to a former client in a substantially related matter

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%2094-48.pdf

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION #94-48 REQUEST #516
Issued July 27, 1994

The inquiring attorney maintains a part-time law practice and is also employed as a full-time police officer in Town A. The attorney asks if he/she may serve as the prosecution officer for Town A and serve as trial counsel for Town A's police cases which appear in District Court. In addition, the attorney asks if he/she may enter the same arrangement with other municipalities other than that of which he/she is employed.

Rule 1.7 entitled "Conflict of Interest: General Rule" states:

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

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

(2) the client consents after consultation . . .

The Panel opines that the inquiring attorney may serve as trial counsel for Town A and other municipalities as long as the lawyer's own interests do not materially limit the lawyer's responsibilities to other clients. The inquiring attorney may not serve as a prosecution officer to a municipality where he/she represented a defendant in his/her law practice for the same or a related matter.

The Panel does not address the issue of the inquiring attorney's obligations to Town A as a full-time police officer of Town A, as this is not a matter governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct.

The Panel cautions the inquiring attorney with regard to Rule 1.10 entitled "Imputed Disqualification: General Rule" which states in pertinent part that "While lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so by Rules 1.7, 1.8(c), 1.9 or 2.2."