November 1965

CONFLICTING INTERESTS -- DISTRICT ATTORNEY -- COUNTY'S SUIT ON FIDELITY BOND.  A District Attorney (or his law firm) may not ethically represent the bonding company defendant in a civil suit filed by a county situated in his district for misappropriation by a county official after presentation by the District Attorney of the facts to a grand jury.

Canon 6.


Suppose that a District Attorney receives from a County Attorney (of a county in his district) information pertaining to misappropriation of county property, for use in presenting the matter to a grand jury, and that later, no indictment being returned, the County Attorney filed a civil suit on behalf of the county against a county official and the surety on his fidelity bond, alleging such misappropriation.  Would it be unethical for the law firm of which the District Attorney is a member to represent the surety in such civil suit?


Yes, such representation would violate Canon 6See Opinion 94, 109, 113, 143 and 183. (9-0.)