Opinion 1161

The Committee again considered your inquiry regarding the appearance of a lawyer or members of a lawyer's firm before a judge where the lawyer is a principal in forming a preliminary committee of citizens to support the judge as a candidate for election. The Committee was provided with a copy of the recent Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee opinion on this same question. By a vote of 11-0, with one abstention, the Committee was of the opinion that the lawyer who was the principle in a judicial campaign committee may practice before the judge only if there is full disclosure of the campaign relationship to adverse parties. The Committee noted that while the judge may be under a duty to disclose the relationship and/or disqualify him or herself, pursuant to RPC 8.4(d) and (f), it is the lawyer's duty to initiate the disclosure in a timely manner so as to avoid any prejudice to an opposing party who might object.

Further, by a vote of 8-3, the Committee was of the opinion that the disclosure requirement would not extend to other members of the lawyer's firm. Finally, by a vote of 5-4, the Committee was of the opinion that this disclosure requirement would continue indefinitely rather then merely for the period of the term of office for which the lawyer acted on behalf of the judge.

Advisory Opinions are provided for the education of the Bar and reflect the opinion of the Committee on Professional Ethics (CPE) or its predecessors. Advisory Opinions are provided pursuant to the authorization granted by the Board of Governors, but are not individually approved by the Board and do not reflect the official position of the Bar association. Laws other than the Washington State Rules of Professional Conduct may apply to the inquiry. The Committee's answer does not include or opine about any other applicable law other than the meaning of the Rules of Professional Conduct.