State of New Jersey Department Of The Public Advocate 240 West State St. P.O. Box  851   Trenton, NJ 08625-0851 Phone: (609) 826-5090    Fax: (609) 984-4747

JON S. CORZINE Governor For Immediate Release:  July 19, 2007

RONALD K. CHEN Public Advocate Contact: Nancy Parello 609-826-5054 609-815-0531 (cell)

When a state-employed attorney joins a private firm, both the attorney and the firm may be barred from representing clients in matters that the former state attorney was involved in while in public service, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled today.

“This decision strengthens state efforts to hold all state employees to uniformly high ethical standards and prevent actual conflicts of interests as well as the appearance of conflicts,” said Jo Astrid Glading, assistant public advocate, who had brought the issue to the Supreme Court. “As a result, the public can have greater confidence that public servants are working only in the best interests of New Jersey citizens.”

Essentially, the court ruled that when a former government attorney joins a private firm, the more stringent post-employment restriction under the state Conflicts of Interest statute applies, rather than a more permissive provision under the attorney Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC).

The state statute prevents the entire firm from working on any matter in which one of its attorneys was directly involved while in state employment if the attorney has an interest in the private firm, while the RPCs bind only the individual lawyer.

The Public Advocate had petitioned the court to review an advisory opinion issued by the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics. The Advisory Committee had ruled that the less stringent provision under the Court’s Rules of Professional Conduct should prevail over the New Jersey Conflicts of Interest Law.   The Supreme Court ruling reverses that opinion.

“The court agrees with the Public Advocate that an exemption for attorneys from the New Jersey Conflicts of Interest Law would be incongruous with the State’s strong policy of ensuring uniformly high ethical standards designed to stimulate public confidence in civil servants,” the ruling said.

“The court recognized that the other branches of state government have a legitimate interest in holding government employees and former employees to high ethical standards to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest,” said Glading, who also argued the case before the Supreme Court.

The court held that the New Jersey conflicts of Interest Law “serves a legitimate governmental purpose and does not improperly encroach on judicial interests…’’

“The New Jersey Conflicts of Interest Law endeavors to maintain the public’s confidence in government and its officers and employees by ensuring that public servants do not use their official positions to earn money unfairly, especially at the expense of the public,” the ruling said.

Read the court ruling.