Can a lawyer serve as district attorney while remaining a member of a private law firm?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether it violates the Canons for a member of a law firm to hold the office of district attorney, on the stated condition that no member of the firm takes a case, criminal or civil, against the state or county.

The Committee called this a close question. A majority concluded it would not violate the Canons of Ethics for a member of a law firm to continue as a firm member while holding the office of district attorney, provided no member of the firm takes a civil or criminal case against the state or county. The vote was 5-4, and two of the members voting with the majority suggested that the practice should not be encouraged. The opinion's headnote frames the question as one of conflicting interests under Canon 6.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1956, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a Texas lawyer be a district attorney and stay in private practice with a firm under this opinion?

A: Yes, by a 5-4 vote, so long as no member of the firm took a civil or criminal case against the state or county.

Q: Was the Committee's vote unanimous?

A: No. It split 5-4, and two members in the majority added that the practice should not be encouraged.

Q: What was the controlling condition?

A: That no member of the firm take a case, civil or criminal, against the state or county. The headnote ties the conflicting-interests concern to Canon 6.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 6, the conflicting-interests provision of the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar of Texas, as applied to a lawyer who simultaneously holds public prosecutorial office and remains in a private firm. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 1.7 (conflicts of interest) and Model Rule 1.10 (imputation of conflicts within a firm).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.7 (conflicts of interest), as the modern analog
• MR 1.10 (imputation of conflicts), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 6 (conflicting interests)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 126: County Attorney Accepting Other Employment
• TX Ethics Op. 143: Prosecutor Pressing a Civil Suit
• TX Ethics Op. 137: A Prosecutor and a Represented Defendant

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-132/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_132.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Is it a violation of the Code of Ethics for a member of a law firm to hold the office of district attorney, provided no member of the firm takes a case, criminal or civil against the state or county?

18 Baylor L. Rev. 248 (1966)

CONFLICTING INTERESTS - DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
It is not ,improper for an attorney to serve as district attorney without severing his membership in a law firm so long as no member of the firm takes a civil or criminal case against the state or county.

Canon 6.

This inquiry presents a close question. However, a majority of the members of the committee are of the opinion that it would not be a violation of the Canons of Ethics for a member of a law firm to continue as a member of the firm while holding the office of district attorney, provided no member of the firm takes a civil or criminal case against the state or county. Two members so voting suggest, however, that the practice should not be encouraged. (5-4)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 132 (1956)