CEO 82-7 -- January 25, 1982

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

CITY MAYOR'S LAW FIRM REPRESENTING CLIENTS WITH CLAIMS AGAINST CITY

To: Norman Ciment, Mayor, Miami Beach

SUMMARY:

A prohibited conflict of interest exists where a city mayor is a member of a law firm which represents clients with claims against the city, even though the representations existed before the mayor took office. In CEO 80-12, the Commission advised that a prohibited conflict of interest would be created were a city commissioner to be employed as an attorney by a law firm which represents clients in suits filed against the city. There, it was found that a city commissioner's regard for his private interests as an employee of the law firm representing a plaintiff against the city would be completely incompatible with proper regard for his public duties as a city commissioner in seeing that the city prevailed in litigation. Similarly, in CEO 80-26, the Commission advised that a city attorney's partnership interest in a law firm representing a client against the city would impede the full and faithful discharge of his public duties to represent the city in legal matters and to supervise the legal department of the city. The Commission was of the opinion that the mayor's conflict of interest would be eliminated only by terminating his firm's representation of the claimants.

QUESTION:

Does a prohibited conflict of interest exist where you are the mayor of a city and where your law firm represents clients with claims against the city?

Your question is answered in the affirmative.

In your letter of inquiry you advise that recently you were elected Mayor of the City of Miami Beach, which operates under a City Commissioner/Manager form of government, under which the Mayor is the chief executive of the City. The Mayor's duties generally are limited to conducting City Commission meetings, voting as one of seven Commissioners, and executing legal documents on behalf of the City.

You also advise that you are an attorney and that your law firm represents individuals who have personal injury or other claims pending against the City. These claims, you advise, pre-existed your election as Mayor. Finally, you advise that the City is covered by insurance, with the insurance company servicing the coverage and engaging its own counsel to defend any lawsuits independent of any instruction from the City.

In a previous opinion, CEO 80-12, we advised that a prohibited conflict of interest would be created were a city commissioner to be employed as an attorney by a law firm which represents clients in suits filed against the city. There, we found that a city commissioner's regard for his private interests as an employee of the law firm representing a plaintiff against the City would be completely incompatible with proper regard for his public duties as a city commissioner in seeing that the city prevailed in litigation. Similarly, in CEO 80-26, we advised that a city attorney's partnership interest in a law firm representing a client against the city would impede the full and faithful discharge of his public duties to represent the city in legal matters and to supervise the legal department of the city.

Accordingly, based upon the considerations raised in these two opinions, we find that a prohibited conflict of interest exists in your law firm's representation of clients with claims against the City which you serve as Mayor. We are of the opinion that this conflict of interest would be eliminated only by terminating your firm's representation of the claimants. Personally withdrawing from the firm's representation of the clients by amending the partnership agreement so that you do not share in their fees would not eliminate the conflict of interest, which is based as much upon your relationship with the firm and your interest in the firm as upon your personal financial interests in the outcome of the clients' claims. Nor do we feel that full disclosure of your position to the City and to the clients followed by avoiding any communication with City officials or agents concerning the clients' claims would eliminate the conflict of interest. In this event, you still would maintain your relationship with the firm, which would be in communication with the City officials and agents who are subject to the supervision and authority of the Mayor.