伦理意见231

作为立法者的靠谱的滚球平台

作为立法者的靠谱的滚球平台

A D.C. 理事会成员可以参与理事会对影响其靠谱的滚球平台事务所客户的立法的审议.

适用的规则

• 1.2(b)(代理范围)
• 1.3(b)(3)(勤奋和热情)
• 1.7(b)(4)(利益冲突)
• 6.4(法律改革活动)

调查

询问者是D的成员.C. 他也是一家靠谱的滚球平台事务所的成员. 该靠谱的滚球平台事务所的业务仅限于人身伤害, 工人的补偿, 医疗事故和建筑案件. 该成员询问《靠谱的足球滚球平台》是否适用于其作为理事会成员的角色，以及如何适用于该角色, 特别是就关于医生责任的立法进行表决. 没有迹象表明这项立法会影响该公司目前的任何客户, 尽管这是有可能的, 但这可能会对该公司未来的业务产生不利影响.

讨论

The subject of legal or ethical constraints on the conduct of a practicing lawyer who is also an elected member of a legislative body is addressed specifically and primarily by legislation and regulations.¹ 没有任何规则直接适用于或限制靠谱的滚球平台的行为, 同时, 作为靠谱的滚球平台事务所的成员和当选的立法机构的成员. 鉴于靠谱的滚球平台同时也是立法者的频率, 人们会期望在规则中明确规定对这类靠谱的滚球平台的活动或职责的任何额外的道德约束. 相应的, we believe that the sometimes-vague provisions of general rules should not too readily be construed to impose such constraints unless clearly required by their language or purpose.

规则1.11, 就像美国靠谱的滚球平台协会的示范规则一样, 仅适用于“连续的政府和私人就业”.意见No. 31, 就国会而言, we noted that the former Code of Professional Responsibility applied "only to staff attorneys acting in their capacity as attorneys. 对国会议员的行为是否得体，我们无权过问, 谁可能是靠谱的滚球平台，也可能不是, 但无论如何他们都是国会议员."²

ABA Informal Opinion 1182 (1971) concluded that "[n]o Disciplinary 规则 of the Code of Professional Responsibility contain a provision that will necessarily and always prohibit a lawyer's representing either an individual or an organization that is likely to be affected by the passage or defeat of proposed legislation, 尽管靠谱的滚球平台也是立法者.意见指出，“我们的结论在以前的《靠谱的滚球平台》下基本上是一样的。. 看到 第306号意见(1962)."

美国靠谱的滚球平台协会第306号正式意见(1962年)的结论是, 更早的《美国靠谱的滚球平台协会道德规范, 允许靠谱的滚球平台在律所成员为其成员的立法机构出庭或游说, where the applicable law expressly or by necessary implication permitted such action or provided for the member to disqualify himself. 其理由是，根据《佳能》规定，已经获得了允许代表相互冲突的利益所需要的同意.³

《靠谱的足球滚球平台》确实规定了在立法机构“代表客户”的靠谱的滚球平台的具体义务(看到 规则3.9), 但他们在这里没有牵连，如果, 正如我们所理解的, 该成员及其靠谱的滚球平台事务所的其他人均未就有关法例向立法会代表客户.

The conclusion that the 规则 were not generally intended to reach the actions of a lawyer as a legislator is even stronger than under the former Code, in view of other provisions added to the 规则 that distinguish between the role of a lawyer in representing clients and the lawyer's role as a citizen. 例如，规则1.2(b), 守则的纪律规则中没有相应的条文, 规定“靠谱的滚球平台代表委托人” . . . 不构成对客户政治立场的认可, 经济, 社会, 或道德观点或道德活动.同理，规则6.(四)鼓励靠谱的滚球平台开展法律改革活动, 并允许靠谱的滚球平台为法律改革组织服务，即使改革可能会影响靠谱的滚球平台客户的利益. 但是，对规则6的评论2.第4条指出，参与此类活动的靠谱的滚球平台应注意根据其他规则对委托人承担的义务, 特别是1.7.

虽然《靠谱的滚球平台》没有类似的规定, 欧共体8-1也反映了类似的原则, 委员会在第1号意见中讨论的问题. 第204条，该规定也适用于本规则1.7和6.如当时提议的那样. 看到id. n.1. 在那里，我们得出的结论是，在代理机构之前代表客户的靠谱的滚球平台事务所可以在自己的名义文件中对拟议的规则发表评论, 除非有注释, 如果采用, 是否会对其客户未决或即将提交的申请产生不利影响. 正如委员会所指出的, “靠谱的滚球平台不会为了代表客户而完全牺牲宪法第一修正案赋予他们的权利……” Id. p. 5.

意见没有. 第204条也提到了法典下的DR 7-101(A)(3)条，并将其结转(在D ..C. 规则(但不包括ABA模型规则)作为规则1.3(b)(2). It provides that "a lawyer shall not intentionally… (2) 偏见或损害 a client during the course of the professional relationship.”委员会发现“在工作关系期间”的含义已由欧共体第7-17 (id. p. 4、引用欧共体7-17):

The obligation of loyalty to his client applies only to a lawyer in the discharge of his professional duties and implies no obligation to adopt a personal viewpoint favorable to the interests or desires of his client [footnote set forth below]. 而靠谱的滚球平台必须始终谨慎行事，以使他的行为不会对委托人的权利产生不利影响 他正在处理一件事, 他可以在公共问题上采取立场，支持他喜欢的法律改革，而不考虑任何客户的个人观点. (强调说.⁴

如前所述，第19号意见. 204的结论是，靠谱的滚球平台事务所不能提交自己的意见，如果, 他们是被收养的吗?, 它们可能使本所代表的申请人在评论的主题方面产生偏见. There the Committee treated "during the course of the professional relationship" as having only a temporal dimension and as applying to a lawyer's actions taken outside of the professional relationship. 这里用同样的方法, 第1号意见中还有一个问题没有具体讨论. 204, i.e., whether a lawyer-legislator's vote on legislation adversely affecting a client's interests can be said to constitute "intentional[ ] . . . 偏见或损害."有关的偏见源于靠谱的滚球平台作为立法者的行为, 在履行这一职务的义务时, 任何这种偏见似乎都是立法者行使公共职责的偶然结果. 相应的, 我们不会认为靠谱的滚球平台“故意”对委托人造成偏见, 没有证据表明有这样的主观意图.⁵

仍然存在的问题是，调查是否受到规则1的更一般约束的影响.7. Since we understand that neither the Council member nor other members of his firm are "represent[ing] clients" with respect to passage of the legislative proposal, the rules concerning conflicts are implicated primarily with respect to their impact on representation by the member or his firm of clients who might be adversely affected by legislation on which the member may be called to upon to act as a legislator.

规则1.第7(b)(4)条规定, 未经客户知情同意, 有下列情形之一的，靠谱的滚球平台不得代理委托人:

the lawyer's professional judgment on behalf of the client will be or reasonably may be adversely affected by the lawyer's responsibilities to or interests in a third party or the lawyer's own financial, 业务, 财产或个人利益.

重要的是要注意规则1.7(b)(4) does not address a situation where a lawyer's actions as a legislator could adversely affect the interests of a client or potential client. 而, it only addresses situations where "the lawyer's professional judgment" on the client's behalf in a matter will or may be adversely affected. Even if the lawyer's position or responsibilities as a legislator could be deemed to involve responsibilities to or interests in "a third party" (e.g.(选民，立法机构)，或“靠谱的滚球平台自己的” . . . interests"—questions we need not decide—nothing in the facts of the present inquiry suggests any adverse effect on the lawyer's professional judgment in the representation of clients. 因此，我们发现规则1不包括这种情况.7(b)(4)，因此无需征得客户同意.

我们的结论是, 根据调查提出的事实, no provision of the 规则 would require client consent or preclude the Council member from voting on legislation that could affect the future 业务 of the member's law firm, 假设会员可以按照适用的法律这样做, 这是我们没有解决的问题.

调查没有. 91-6-26
通过:1992年9月15日

1. 第1号解释性意见. 91-20, 5月31日, 1991, the Director of the District of Columbia’s Office of Campaign 1 Finance concluded that the member’s vote in opposition to a bill limiting liability of physicians in free health care clinics could create the appearance that the member’s official position has been used to obtain financial gain for the member’s firm, in accordance with违反;.C. 法典91-1461(b)，这将需要一份潜在冲突的书面声明. 该意见还发现，没有法律规定该成员必须回避. 《靠谱的滚球平台》指出，关于18 .美国法律的适用存在一些问题.S.C. §208致理事会成员, 并要求美国政府道德办公室就此问题发表意见, 但我们被告知，目前还没有任何意见.
2. 同样，区分靠谱的滚球平台作为靠谱的滚球平台的角色和立法机构中的靠谱的滚球平台, 立法会议员就《靠谱的足球滚球平台》所建议的Sims委员会报告.C. 巴尔的结论是，“受雇于政府司法和立法部门的靠谱的滚球平台...who are in fact employed and functioning as lawyers in the Judicial and Legislative branches should be governed by the same 规则 as Executive branch lawyers. D.C. 靠谱的滚球平台事务特别委员会, 政府靠谱的滚球平台与职业行为示范规则报告17 (1988). 这一意见只涉及靠谱的滚球平台也是立法者的问题
3. 相比之下, Informal Opinion 1087 (1969) concluded that under Canon 6 neither a lawyer who is a member of the ABA 3 House of Delegates nor a member of his firm could properly represent a client in 看到king to influence passage or defeat of a proposal pending before that body, 因为没有任何规则规定同意，成员不能自由放弃其职能而不投票.
4. 欧共体7-17的脚注包括以下解释:
No doubt some tax lawyers feel constrained to abstain from activities on behalf of a better tax system because they think that their clients may object. Clients have no right to object if the tax adviser handles their affairs competently and faithfully and independently of his private views as to tax policy.
5. 意见没有. 204涉及到一个完全不同的情况, 靠谱的滚球平台没有义务亲自参与, 以他们自己的名义, 在行政程序中显然会或可能会损害他们的一些客户.