Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout89-576 HannaMr. Michael K. Hanna, Sr. Williamson, Coploff & Hanna 89 - 576 Attorneys at Law 136 East Water Street Lock Haven, PA 17745 Res Attorney, Municipal Solicitor, Representation, Section 3(a), Campaign for General Assembly. Dear Mr. Hanna: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL October 10, 1989 This responds to your letters of September 21 and 29, 1989, in which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether the Ethics Law imposes any restrictions or prohibition upon an attorney in the practice of law if he is successful in a campaign for the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and thereafter would represent clients before Commonwealth agencies or would serve as solicitor for various municipalities. Facts: You are currently a partner in the firm of Williamson, Coploff & Hanna and are considering a campaign for the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. If you are successful in your campaign, you inquire as to whether you would be precluded under the Ethics Law from the practice of law or representation of clients in actions where the Commonwealth is a party such as criminal matters, motor vehicles matters, workman's compensation matters, condemnation matters, agency appeals, etc. You also inquire as to whether any prohibition would extend to the partners in your firm. Lastly, you note that both you and your partners serve as municipal solicitors to various boroughs and townships. You inquire as to whether your election to the General Assembly would affect your ability to act as solicitor for municipalities and if so, whether that prohibition would extend to your partners. Page 2 Discussion: Pennsylvania Public Utility Bar Association v. Thornburgh, 434 A.2d 1327, 62 Pa. Cmwlth. 88 (1981), affirmed per curiam 450 A.2d 613, 498 Pa. 589 (1982) dealt with the applicability of Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act of 1978 to attorneys in the regulation of their practice of law. However, you seek clarification on the applicability of the current Public Official and Employee Ethics Law to your situation and any restrictions that might be placed upon your conduct with respect to your practice of law and if you run and /or elect to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. In Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Bar Association, supra, the Court held that Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act of 1978 was an impermissible intrusion upon the Supreme Court's authority to regulate an attorney's conduct; the State Ethics Commission has applied this decision to mean that there are no prohibitions under Section 3(g) of the current Ethics Law upon your conduct insofar as that conduct constitutes the practice of law. Spataro, Opinion 89 -009. Therefore, insofar as your conduct before the agency or entity with which you were associated, would constitute the practice of law, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law cannot be applied to restrict that proposed activity. Particular reference should be made to the decision of the Commonwealth Court at Footnote 7, 434 A.2d at page 1331 -1332. In this note, the Court indicated that any activity in which an attorney purports to render professional services to a client may only be regulated by the Supreme Court. We must conclude that to the extent that you would represent a client, as a lawyer, before the Commonwealth, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not operate to bar such activity. We will assume, for the purposes of this Advice, that you intend to undertake these activities in the capacity of lawyer - client, that these activities would constitute the practice of law, and that the provisions of Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law, pursuant to the mandate of the Supreme Court's ruling would, therefore, be inapplicable. Therefore, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not preclude you or partners in your firm from representing clients in actions where the Commonwealth is a party. In addition, the Ethics Law would not restrict your ability or that of your partners to continue as solicitors for municipalities. You are reminded that Section 4(a) of the Ethics Law requires you as a solicitor to file a Financial Interest Statement. See Spataro supra. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law; the propriety of any other Page 3 statute, code, regulation or ordinance other than the Ethics Law has not been considered. Specifically not addressed in this Advice is the applicability of the Rules of Professional Conduct or the Legislative Code of Conduct. Conclusion: Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law does not restrict your representation or your activities, as outlined above, insofar as those activities constitute the practice of law. Section 4(a) of the Ethics Law requires solicitors to file a Statement of Financial Interests. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requestor has disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the Advice given. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to challenge same, you may request that the full Commission review this Advice. A personal appearance before the Commission will be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be in writing and must be received at the Commission within 15 days of the date of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code S2.12. VJD /emg Sincerely, . aO4 Vincent Y. Dopko, Chief Counsel