Opinion 74-27
FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 74-27
October 30, 1974
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
An attorney who is a member of a municipal advisory board may properly represent a private
client before other municipal agencies and courts provided that: (1) the matter in which the
attorney represents the client has no relationship to any decision made by the board; (2) the board
has no control over any administrative or judicial officer before whom the attorney would
appear; and (3) the board has no control over any public official who may appear in a proceeding
as a witness and whose testimony the attorney might have to attack.
Opinions:
69-21, 69-22, 70-11, 71-12, 71-25, 72-9
Vice Chairman Sullivan stated the opinion of the committee:
A member of The Florida Bar has been asked to serve on the five-member
Advisory Cemetery Board of the city in which his firm’s offices are located. The
Board members serve without pay. Their sole function is to advise the City
Commission, the City Manager and the cemetery trustees in matters relating to the
city cemetery. He will not serve as an attorney for the Board although the fact that
he is an attorney is one of the reasons he has been asked to serve on the Board.
The attorney’s firm appears from time to time in the Municipal Court and
before the City Commission and various city agencies and boards in behalf of the
firm’s clients.
He asks whether he may properly continue that representation if he accepts
the appointment.
The Committee has on numerous occasions dealt with the propriety of attorneys who
serve in part-time or full-time public offices representing private clients in courts or before
administrative bodies. See Opinions 69-21, 69-22, 70-11 [since withdrawn], 71-12, 71-25 and
72-9.
The Committee is of the opinion that, in the absence of any statute or ordinance
prohibiting it, the attorney may properly represent private clients before those agencies and
boards and in that court provided that:
1. The matter in which the attorney represents the client has no relationship to
any decision made by the Board;
2. The Board has no control over any administrative or judicial officer before
whom the attorney would appear; and
3. The Board has no control over any public official who may appear in a
proceeding as a witness and whose testimony the attorney might have to attack.