Opinion 97-46

June 2, 1997

         This is in response to your inquiry (97-46) in which you ask the Committee to reconsider Opinion 96-139, in which the Committee advised that under section 100.6(B)(3) of the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct it would not be permissible for your father, with whom you were in partnership under the firm name _______, to practice in the City Court before the acting City Court judge. You now inform that Committee that you are no longer practicing as a partner with you father, “but merely share space and pay rent to [him].”

         In the view of the Committee, the change from partnership to a space sharing and rental arrangement does not alter the result stated in Opinion 96-139. Section 100.6(B)(3) applies not only to partners but also to persons associated in the practice of law.

         The Committee, on a number of occasions has stated that the sharing of space, as well as other services, constitutes an association in the practice of law giving rise to the prohibition set forth in section 100.6(B)(3) (and its predecessor, section 100.5(f) ) of the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct. See, e.g., Joint Opinion 94-93 and 94-106 (Vol. XIII). Thus, it remains that your father may not be permitted to practice in the court in which you are a part-time judge.