An unnamed state agency has initiated an investigation of land transactions in southern New Jersey and has indicated an intention to interview the layman. The inquirer agreed to represent the layman, understanding that the targets of the investigation were non clients. Later, the inquirer was informed that certain transactions in which he or some member of his family was involved would also be subjects of the investigation. As to the first question, the Committee finds that it would be improper for the attorney to represent the layman. Under the former Canons of Professional Ethics, it was said that the full disclosure and consent exception does not sanction representation of conflicting interest in every case where consent is given, but merely forbids it except in those cases.
Consent generally is found to be unavailable when public interest is involved.
Drinker , supra, 120. The public interest is clearly involved where there is a state investigation. Thus, we conclude that the inquirer may not represent the layman because of a probable conflict of interest regardless of full disclosure and consent. We are of the opinion that the second question presents a legal rather than an ethical problem.