Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout80-532 UmbenhauerTO: RE: FACTS: DISCUSSION: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 February 22, 1980 ADVICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL Richard A. Umbenhauer Nikolaus, Hohenadel & Greiner 327 Locust Street Columbia, PA 17512 Advice # 80 -532 Attorney Client Disclosure Requirement Spouse of a Borough Council Member Being Employed by the Borough On February 1, 1980 Richard A. Umbenhauer wrote this Commission asking whether a law firm which represents an insurance company must reveal the name of the carrier or the insured where the insured writes home owners policies within the borough for which the law firm serves as a solicitor. Clarification is also requested where a spouse of a borough council member is a full -time employee of the borough. The client disclosure requirement for solicitors relates only to those situations where the solicitor receives adjusted gross income from a client for matters dealing with the solicitor's governmental body. Thus, under the above facts neither the carrier nor the insured would be disclosed on the Financial Interests Statement. As a practical matter the only time disclosure would be required of a solicitor where the work was performed consistent with the Code of Professional Responsibility is where the individual accepts a new solicitorship, and has clients, or is receiving partnership distribution fees from clients who are dealing with or have litigation with that governmental body. Where a spouse of a new borough council member has been an employee prior to the public official assuming office, and the position does not normally call for formal written contracts or contract renewals, there is no conflict of interest in the borough council member holding office. The borough council member should however abstain from taking part in any decisions of the borough council which - affect his or her spouse. Richard A. Umbenhauer February 22, 1980 Page 2 CONCLUSION: DRM /rdp -2 The phrase, "doing business within the jurisdiction of the governmental body" relates to the jurisdictional power of that body and not geographical jurisdiction only. There is no conflict of interest of a spouse of a long term borough employee holding the position of borough councilmen, however, that public official shall abstain from participating in any matter effecting his or her spouse. 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 disclsoed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the advice given. A personal appearance before the Commission and a formal opinion will be issued upon your request if you feel this reply does not suffice. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. DAVID RITTENHOUSE MORRISON Chief Counsel