The Idaho State Bar Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility issued formal ethics opinions from 1944 until the Committee was suspended by the Board of Commissioners in 1994. The last formal ethics opinion issued by the Committee was in 1992. The Idaho State Bar Board of Commissioners issued one formal ethics opinion in 1999.
The Committee was suspended in 1994 and its continued viability was referred to a Long Range Planning Committee of the Idaho State Bar. The Long Range Planning Committee met between 1995 and 1999, and evidently concluded that the Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility was no longer viable, because it was discontinued.
The following formal ethics opinions, although dated, remain formal ethics opinions of the Idaho State Bar. Since the current format of the Idaho Rules of Professional Conduct were adopted in 1986, and have been amended a number of times since 1986, most of the formal ethics opinions do not address the current Idaho Rules of Professional Conduct. Please note that many of these formal opinions have been designated obsolete, disavowed, overruled, superceded by another formal opinion or subsequently addressed by an ABA ethics opinion. The Notes column on the Formal Ethics Opinions List, the front page of the link to these formal ethics opinions, should therefore be consulted with respect to the subsequent treatment of any particular formal opinion. However, the principles addressed in the formal opinions, to the extent they remain applicable and consistent with the current Idaho Rules of Professional Conduct are still utilized to interpreting the current Rules.
If you have any questions about the applicability of any formal opinion to an issue you are addressing, please feel free to contact Brad Andrews, Bar Counsel, at (208) 334-4500.
Because of the discontinuance of the Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, the current process to request a formal ethics opinion of the Idaho State Bar is to make that request to the Idaho State Bar Board of Commissioners, c/o of Bar Counsel, P.O. Box 895, Boise, Idaho 83701. The Idaho State Bar Board of Commissioners, in its discretion, decides whether any particular topic merits a formal ethics opinion, and if it does, will issue a formal ethics opinion. The general standards that the Idaho State Bar Board of Commissioners generally considers are whether a request for a formal opinion is of general application to the members of the Idaho State Bar, as opposed to responsive to a specific, unique set of facts or circumstances and whether the request is of sufficient breadth and interest to the Bar as a whole. As noted above, very few requests for formal opinions are granted.
The following opinions are in PDF format. 
YEAR |
# |
DESCRIPTION |
NOTES |
| 1944 |
1 |
Candidate for Supreme Court not to express opinion on prior Supreme Court Decision |
|
| 1956 |
2 |
Advertising |
obsolete |
| 1956 |
3 |
“Hanging a Shingle” is OK |
|
| 1957 |
4 |
Lawyer w/second Occupation (Real Estate) |
see #6,103,109 |
| 1957 |
5 |
Judge as Executor of Estate |
Disavowed |
| 1957 |
6 |
Lawyer as Insurance Adjustor |
see #4,103,109 and ABA #47 |
| 1958 |
7 |
Lawyer in Phone Book |
obsolete |
| 1958 |
8 |
Fee Schedules, etc. |
obsolete |
| 1958 |
9 |
Referral Limitations/Tax Collector–Advisor Conflict of Interest |
|
| 1958 |
10 |
County Attorney not to act as Defense Counsel |
see #50,77,105 |
| 1959 |
11 |
Dual Capacity/Advertising/Joint Ads |
see 103,109,4,6 |
| 1959 |
12 |
Judicial Education |
obsolete |
| 1959 |
13 |
OK to file suit even if SOL has Run |
ABA Op 272 |
| 1959 |
14 |
Not OK to Lie to Client |
|
| Undated Opinion |
15 |
Lawyer as Prospective Witness |
see DR 5-101,
5-102 |
| 1959 |
16 |
Public Attorney Partnership w/Private Attorney |
|
| Undated Opinion |
17 |
Judge as Prosecutor |
see #23 |
| Undated Opinion |
18 |
DA as Private Attorney – facts also apply in criminal case |
see #32,43 |
| Undated Opinion |
19 |
Criminal Defense - pleas of not guilty, indigent status, payment of court appearance fees |
|
| 1959 |
20 |
Judge not to solicit support in campaign |
|
| 1959 |
21 |
Divorce Cases – contingent fees no good (support, etc. – read this) |
|
| Undated Opinion |
22 |
Civil Case – contacting officers/directors of corporation – must be through counsel but C.F. employees |
|
| Undated Opinion |
23 |
Judge Practicing Law |
Obsolete |
| Undated Opinion |
24 |
Lawyers refer case, duty to each other, division of fees |
see #27 |
| Undated Opinion |
25 |
Councilman/Lawyer conflict, firm unit rule |
|
| 1960 |
26 |
Advertising/Shingle |
probably obsolete |
| 1960 |
27 |
2nd Lawyer no duty as to 1st lawyer’s unpaid fee/local custom |
also see #27 |
| 1960 |
28 |
Prosecutor/Deputy prosecutor-different law firms-conflicts |
see 10,17,18,105 |
| 1961 |
29 |
Firm Name: can’t mislead as to who partners are, or were. |
|
| 1961 |
30 |
Division of Fees, disclosure to client, finder’s fees |
see #24 |
| 1961 |
31 |
Prosecutors/private employment/possible conflicts |
|
| 1961 |
32 |
Prosecutor/private case – if same facts – no good.
Good overview of this Area |
see ABA Opinion #135 |
| 1962 |
33 |
Title company/realtor-lawyer as drafter of deeds, etc. |
Not permitted |
| 1962 |
34 |
Conflict of Interest/former client/appearance of impropriety |
|
| 1962 |
35 |
Conflict/dual representation/consent ineffective |
see #93 |
| Undated Opinion |
36 |
Collection Agencies/lawyers/fee arrangements |
see #37 |
| 1962 |
37 |
Collection Agencies/role of credit agency/use of letterhead |
|
| 1962 |
38 |
Judge as Attorney |
Obsolete |
| 1962 |
39 |
Court Reporter – court personnel/opposing counsel |
|
| 1963 |
40 |
Bank as Trustee/conflict of interest/solicitation/appearance of impropriety |
|
| 1963 |
41 |
City Attorney as criminal Defender |
Superceded by #105 |
| 1964 |
42 |
Not Unethical for Lawyer to “Take the 5th”. |
|
| 1964 |
43 |
Deputy Prosecutor: same fact situation – conflict |
see 18,32 |
| 1964 |
44 |
Client belongs to firm, not lawyer re: announcements of leaving, solicitation, encroachment |
see #108 |
| 1966 |
45 |
Telephone listings in area not served by Lawyer |
see #63 |
| Undated Opinion |
46 |
Conflict from before one becomes a Lawyer, still conflict |
adopts ABA #906 |
| 1968 |
47 |
Duty of Diligence-court appointments, duty not to excuse |
|
| 1969 |
48 |
Re: Credit Card Payment of Fees - Adopts ABA #1120. |
superceded by #70 |
| 1969 |
49 |
Non-partners in same office-generally shouldn’t oppose each other. |
see #94 |
| 1971 |
50 |
Prosecutor/City Attorney as Defender – no good. See “2 Public Employees” Notion |
see #105 |
| 1971 |
51 |
City Attorney’s Firm can’t Defend Criminals |
superceded by #105 |
| 1971 |
52 |
Use of Retired/Deceased Persons on letterhead |
|
| 1971 |
53 |
Prosecutor/Defender Prohibition – possible exception |
also see #105 |
| 1971 |
54 |
Threat of Criminal Prosecution/Civil matter, by Deputy DA |
|
| 1971 |
55 |
OK for Public Defender/Private Criminal attorney to be partners |
#84 is similar |
| 1972 |
56 |
Lawyer as CPA |
see #103,109, obsolete |
| 1972 |
57 |
Advertising-publication of list of members |
obsolete? |
| 1972 |
58 |
Initially approached by “A” then represent “B”/share space w/MD |
#49,94 |
| 1972 |
59 |
Advertising/Public interest firms – obsolete |
|
| 1973 |
60 |
Representation of county and city in same county – OK |
|
| 1973 |
61 |
Attorney as Witness-when to withdraw – some changes here? |
|
| 1973 |
62 |
Bidding for public agency legal contract is not permitted |
see #99 |
| 1973 |
63 |
Telephone listing of lawyers |
see #45 - mostly obsolete |
| 1973 |
64 |
Husband/wife, lawyer/clerk – possible conflicts |
|
| 1973 |
65 |
Withholding services (divorce) until bill paid – improper |
|
| 1973 |
66 |
Unrepresented person – giving forms to sign, giving them advice – OK for receipt of service of process. |
|
| 1973 |
67 |
Propriety of acting as attorney for Group (student groups, etc.) |
|
| 1973 |
68 |
Letterhead – inactive members in govt. service |
see #16,52,109 |
| 1973 |
69 |
Conflict and Remedies – member of public body and clients before it. |
|
| 1973 |
70 |
Credit Card Payment OK, no “discounts” or “Specials” |
overrules #48 |
| Undated Opinion |
71 |
No conflict for AG doing paternity and back payment requests |
see #37 |
| 1974 |
72 |
Lawyer advertising in “Job Wanted” context |
obsolete |
| 1974 |
73 |
Advertising – New Associate – |
obsolete |
| 1974 |
74 |
Prosecutor not to challenge constitutionality of statute-conflict |
see #91 |
| 1974 |
75 |
Confidentiality – both parties, husband & wife, dead, contract to will - charitable beneficiary |
|
| 1974 |
76 |
Public Defender, paid by country, opposing county – OK. County not real client |
|
| 1974 |
77 |
Part-time Juvenile Prosecutor – still conflicts w/criminal defense work |
see #10,53 |
| 1974 |
78 |
Obligation to undertake indigent representation |
|
| 1974 |
79 |
Broad discussion of “moral” charge lawyers – also husband/wife representation |
|
| 1974 |
80 |
Conflict: Lawyer is adversary and on Disciplinary Board v. same lawyer |
|
| 1974 |
81 |
No Conflict AG employee as hearing officer and drafter |
Page missing |
| 1974 |
82 |
Judge owning property with former partners |
|
| |
83 |
Lawyer as witness should avoid all legal work on client’s case |
see 15,61 |
| 1974 |
84 |
OK for public defender’s partners to do private criminal defense |
see #55,100 |
| 1975 |
85 |
Public attorneys – criminal defense |
superseded by #105 |
| 1975 |
86 |
Possible conflicts of agencies (ILAS, etc.) right to withdraw upon discovering indigency |
|
| 1975 |
87 |
Group legal services – permissible boundaries |
|
| 1975 |
88 |
Dual Professions – CPA |
see #103,109 |
| 1975 |
89 |
Criminal Attorney can post bail for client – (probably) |
|
| 1975 |
90 |
City Attorney as criminal Defender |
superseded by #105 |
| 1975 |
91 |
AG Conflict (both sides) conflict generally public can’t consent |
also see #74 |
| 1975 |
92 |
Public Disclosures – Lawyer’s Duty to a) not try case in press, and b) encourage client to do same |
|
| 1976 |
93 |
Non-Opinion on handling both sides in “Friendly” case |
also see #35 |
| 1976 |
94 |
Share office space – conflict to handle both sides |
see #49 |
| 1976 |
95 |
Suing for Attorney’s fees/”Attorney Fees” in those cases |
|
| 1977 |
96 |
Attorney-Client Privilege – Fugitive – no reveal to FBI |
|
| 1977 |
97 |
Lawyer as “Answer-Man” in paper |
partially obsolete |
| 1977 |
98 |
Contributions to Judicial Campaigns |
|
| 1977 |
99 |
Unethical to propose oneself as Public Defender if no prior intention to have such post. |
see #62 |
| 1977 |
100 |
Public Defender – partners to do some criminal work – he does civil – OK |
see #55,84 |
| Undated Opinion |
101 |
What to turn over to client re: withdrawal, change of attorneys |
|
| Undated Opinion |
102 |
Fee arrangements – how to compute – construction of fee contracts. |
|
| 1981 |
103 |
Dual Professions – financial consulting |
see also 11,88 and 109 |
| 1981 |
104 |
Unethical to pay a contingent fee to a “Witness Finder” |
|
| 1981 |
105 |
City Attorney may do criminal Defendants in certain cases |
|
| 1981 |
106 |
Unethical to seat impostor at counsel table for
mis-identification |
|
| 1981 |
107 |
Improper Advertising – fail to clearly identify “AD” |
|
| 1981 |
108 |
Covenant not to compete – unethical between lawyers |
see #44 |
| 1981 |
109 |
Dual Professions/Letterhead OK/bad to have non-lawyers on letterhead |
|
| 1982 |
110 |
Sharing office space not a conflict – but . . . . |
see #94, #49 |
| 1982 |
111 |
Donation of legal services to charitable auction - unethical |
|
| 1982 |
112 |
Yellow Pages Listing |
|
| 1983 |
113 |
Any ethical problems arise when a father and son, who are also attorneys, practice in the same community where one is prosecuting attorney and the other intends to defend criminal cases |
|
| 1983 |
114 |
Propriety of a lawyer participating in a private attorney referral service |
|
| 1984 |
115 |
Interest on trust accounts |
|
| 1984 |
116 |
Interest on lawyer trust account (IOLTA) |
|
| 1986 |
117 |
Propriety of attorney allowing client, a collection agency, to recover and retain attorney fees awarded by court |
|
| 1987 |
118 |
Conflict – husband in private practice/wife as law clerk |
|
| 1987 |
119 |
Office sharing – criminal defense attorney and part-time prosecutor |
|
| 1988 |
120 |
Lawyer may properly represent client in execution of small claims judgment |
|
| 1988 |
121 |
How to handle unclaimed trust funds |
|
| 1988 |
122 |
Lawyer may not keep a “pad” in the trust account |
|
| 1988 |
123 |
Advertising – should not advertise in city w/no office, w/out clarification |
|
| 1988 |
124 |
Calculation of contingent fees |
|
| 1988 |
125 |
Application of Opinion #117 to government attorneys |
|
| 1988 |
126 |
Advertising – firm names |
|
| 1989 |
127 |
Solicitation – placing random calls |
|
| 1989 |
128 |
Use of “Witness Finder” |
|
| 1989 |
129 |
Small Claims Court |
|
| 1989 |
130 |
Recording Telephone Calls |
|
| 1989 |
131 |
Firm Names |
|
| 1989 |
132 |
NSF Checks – prosecutor violating I.R.P.C. 4.4? |
|
| 1990 |
133 |
Prosecutor defending in other jurisdictions |
|
| 1992 |
134 |
Direct contact with clients |
|
| 1992 |
135 |
Living Trusts |
|
| 1999 |
136 |
Audit Opinion |
|