In the case presently before this committee it appears that the law firm has no intention of acting as Lawyers A and B did in their joint argument. It shall likewise be unlawful for any municipal attorney to represent any person in any cause or proceedings, either civil or criminal, in any court within the municipality for which he is attorney as a party to said proceedings or when such civil or criminal proceedings were instituted or arose during the time when such attorney represented such municipality. An analogous situation occurred in revised Opinion No. 52 of the Ethics Committee of the Mississippi State Bar, dated February 2, 1980. A firm of attorneys was asked to accept employment which would involve litigation against a corporation which one of the firm members was at that time representing on a completely unrelated matter involving collection of a minor commercial account. Thus, we come to the issue of consent.
Consent is irrelevant when public interest in involved.
It appears that a municipality may not give consent because the public interest is involved. For this reason, the Committee is of the opinion that the law firm in the instant case may not represent clients in situations adverse to the city so long as it continues its representation of the city, whether this be on the trial or appellate level.