Conflict Of Interest Municipal Attorney Also Board Of Education Attorney

Annotate this Case

107 N.J.L.J. 127
February 12, 1981
Reversed Opinion
464 In Effect

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS
 
Appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court
 


OPINION 470

Conflict Of Interest
Municipal Attorney Also
Board Of Education Attorney

The inquirer is presently attorney for a township board of education and has been asked to serve as attorney for the township. At the present time, each municipal body has a separate attorney. The inquirer does not state whether the board of education is an appointed or elected Board, but independent investigation reveals that it is an elected Board. In Bodkin v. Westwood, 52 N.J. Super. 416, 425 (App. Div. 1958), the court pointed out that in such cases the board of education was entirely independent of the governmental body of the town. Under these circumstances, there is no reason why the inquirer cannot serve in both capacities with a caveat, however, that if events occur which give rise to a conflict or an appearance of conflict between the two public entities, counsel cannot represent either of the two entities. See Perillo v. Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, 83 N.J. 366 (1980), 0pinion 39, 87 N.J.L.J. 191 (1964), and Opinion 59, 87 N.J.L.J. 741 (1964).

* * *

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.