Conflict of Interest Representing Zoning and Planning Boards

94 N.J.L.J. 225
March 25, 1971
 

OPINION 199

Conflict of Interest
Representing
Zoning and Planning Boards

We have been petitioned to reconsider our Opinion 164, 92 N.J.L.J. 831 (1969), concerning the propriety of an attorney representing both the board of adjustment and the planning board of the same municipality, wherein we used the following language: ...Accordingly, it is our opinion that the potential of conflict between the two boards is so inherent in their different duties, that an attorney should not undertake to represent both boards in the same municipality.
 
After carefully considering the arguments presented by the petitioners for reconsideration we have concluded that the above cited language of Opinion 164 should be modified to read as follows:
...Accordingly, it is our opinion that an attorney should not undertake to represent both boards in the same municipality if there is or may be a conflict of interest in a particular situation. It is not the function of this Committee to decide whether there is incompatibility between the two offices as a matter of law. Such determination can only be made by our courts.