THE SHARING OF OFFICES BY LAWYERS PRECLUDES ONE OF THOSE WHO SO SHARES
WITH ANOTHER FROM ACCEPTING A CASE WHICH THE OTHER CANNOT ETHICALLY
ACCEPT.
QUESTION PRESENTED
In view of the fact that The Advisory Committee has ruled partners
or associates of a lawyer cannot undertake any representation which
the lawyer is ethically prohibited from undertaking, the Committee's
opinion is requested as to whether such prohibition extends to one
who is neither a partner or an associate but simply offices with
and pays rental to the lawyer or law firm which is precluded from
the representation. The inquiring lawyer has his own stationery
and professional cards with no reference thereon to the other lawyer
or law firm, and his name on the entrance door indicates his separate
office.
DISCUSSION
We believe that the question posed above has been answered by the
American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Professional Ethics
in its Informal Opinions Numbered 995 and 885. Informal Opinion
995 is brief and is quoted in full:
"You have inquired whether a lawyer who shares office space
with another lawyer who has been disqualified from representing
a plaintiff is likewise disqualified from representing that plaintiff.
As so stated, we cannot answer your inquiry, as it involves a question
of law, which under out Rules of Procedure we are prohibited from
answering.
"If, however, your question is rephrased to inquire whether
a lawyer sharing offices with another is precluded ethically from
representing a client whom the other lawyer cannot represent, then
the answer appears clear. Canon 6 specifically prohibits the representation
of conflicting interests. In Formal Opinion 33, this Committee held
that this Canon would prohibit a partner from representing a client
whom another member of the partnership could not ethically represent.
In Informal Opinion 284 we held:
'Two lawyers who share offices, although not partners, bear such
close relation to one another as to bring Canon 6 into play.'
"To
the same effect are Formal Opinion 104, Informal Opinion 855, and
Drinker, Legal Ethics, page 106.
"These opinions and decisions appear to apply directly to the
situation regarding which you inquire. We, therefore, hold that
regardless whether or not under the circumstances which you describe
a lawyer who shares office space with another lawyer who is disqualified
from representing a client is likewise disqualified from representing
that client, he may not ethically do so."
Wise in his book on "Legal Ethics" in his chapter on "Conflicting
Interests" in referring to the formal and informal opinions
of the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Professional
Ethics on Page 268, states:
"They have decided that lawyers who share offices, even though
not partners, bear a sufficiently close relation to each other that
they should not be on opposite sides of a case or otherwise represent
inconsistent interests. Thus, a lawyer who shares offices with a
public official who is allowed to practice law should not appear
in any manner in which the official has a duty to perform."
The correlation to the old Canon 6, Adverse Influences and Conflicting
Interest to the present Disciplinary Rules are DR 4-101, DR 5-101
through 5-107.
This Committee concurs in the position taken by the ABA's Committee
on Ethics and therefore concludes that the sharing of offices by
lawyers precludes one of those who so shares from undertaking a
representation which the other cannot ethically undertake.
75-13
|
