Complaint to the DC Bar Office of the Bar Counsel against
Robert Rigsby, DC Corporation Counsel
DCWatch
July 11, 2000

DC Watch Home

Council Period 12

Council Period 13

Council Period 14

Council Period 15

Election 1998

Election 2000

Election 2002

themail

Search DCWatch

OFFICE OF BAR COUNSEL
THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
515 FIFTH STREET, N.W., BUILDING A
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001
(202) 638-1501
FAX (202) 638-0862

Date: July 11, 2000

A. COMPLAINANT: Ms. Dorothy A. Brizill
Executive Director, DCWatch
1327 Girard Street, NW
Washington, DC 20009-4915
Business telephone: 202-234-6982, Home telephone: 202-234-6982
Fax: 202-232-1215, E-mail: dorothy@dcwatch.com

B. ATTORNEY COMPLAINED OF: Mr. Robert R. Rigsby
Corporation Counsel of the District of Columbia
441 4th Street, NW, 10th Floor North
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone No.: 202-724-1520, Fax: 202-347-8922

C. Have you filed a complaint about this matter anywhere else? If yes, please give details.
No.

D. Please attach your retainer agreement with the attorney and (where applicable) state the name of the court where the underlying case was filed and the case name and number.
Not applicable.

E. DETAILS OF THE COMPLAINT:

Robert R. Rigsby is the Corporation Counsel of the District of Columbia, an office legislatively established to serve as the attorney representing the government of the District of Columbia. Anthony A. Williams is the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

On June 9, 2000, I filed a complaint with the District of Columbia Office of Campaign Finance (OCF) against Anthony A. Williams, alleging that he was improperly, and contrary to the Code, Municipal Regulations, and Personnel Regulations of the District of Columbia, using government employees, government facilities, and government resources to campaign in an upcoming election on Charter Amendment #3, the School Governance Charter Amendment. (Attachment 1)

On June 16, 2000, the OCF issued an order stating: "Mayor Williams is to immediately terminate all action involving the use of the resources of the District of Columbia Government to influence the outcome of the June 27, 2000 election on the matter of a Charter Amendment." (Attachment 2)

On June 30, 2000, Mr. Rigsby, on behalf of Mr. Williams, filed an appeal from this order with the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics. (Attachment 3) On July 10, 2000, I filed a preliminary motion with the Board of Elections and Ethics, asking for the dismissal of this appeal because it was improperly filed by the Corporation Counsel. (Attachment 4)

The Corporation Counsel’s representation of the Mayor is inherently a conflict of interest and is contrary to the DC Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct 1.7(a), 1.7(b), and 1.13. The Corporation Counsel represents the government of the District of Columbia. The government’s official position in this matter is the OCF’s position as stated in its June 16 order, and the Corporation Counsel’s representation of a government official (Anthony A. Williams) against the government (OCF) is a breach of his ethical responsibility to his client, the government and citizens of the District of Columbia. The Corporation Counsel’s proper course of conduct is outlined in Comment 8 to Rule 1.13:

There are times when the organization’s interest may be or become adverse to those of one or more of its constituents. In such circumstances the lawyer should advise any constituent, whose interest the lawyer finds adverse to that of the organization, of the conflict or potential conflict of interest, that the lawyer cannot represent such constituent, and that such person may wish to obtain independent representation. Care must be taken to assure that the individual understands that, when there is such adversity of interest, the lawyer for the organization cannot provide legal representation for that constituent individual, and that discussions between the lawyer for the organization and the individual may not be privileged.

While the Corporation Counsel may represent the Mayor or any other official or employee of the District of Columbia in an action involving the government of the District of Columbia, when the interests of that official or employee coincide with the interests of the government, he may not represent the Mayor or any other official or employee of the District government in an adversarial action against that government.

I am requesting the Bar Counsel to investigate this complaint; to advise Mr. Rigsby that his representation of Mr. Williams in this case conflicts with his legal duty to his client, the Government of the District of Columbia; to advise him that his appeal of the OCF’s order was improper and contrary to the Code of Legal Ethics; to admonish him not to represent Mr. Williams any further in this case; and to impose whatever sanctions it finds proper and appropriate.

I HEREBY CERTIFY TO THE OFFICE OF BAR COUNSEL THAT THE STATEMENTS IN THE FOREGOING COMPLAINT ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

Dorothy A. Brizill

Back to top of page

Press Release

July 11, 2000

Today, DCWatch filed a complaint with the Office of Bar Counsel of the DC Bar asserting that Robert Rigsby, Corporation Counsel for the District of Columbia, has engaged in a serious conflict of interest. (http://www.dcwatch.com/election2000/charter33.htm )

The D.C. Office of Campaign Finance issued an order on June 16, 2000, ordering "Mayor Williams to immediately terminate all action involving the use of the resource of the District of Columbia Government to influence the outcome of the July 27, 2000 election on the matter of a Charter Amendment." (http://www.dcwatch.com/election2000/charter6.htm)  

On June 30, 2000, Mr. Rigsby, on behalf of Mayor Williams, appealed this order, arguing that Mayor Williams had a First Amendment right to use governmental employees and resources to promote his position in election campaigns: ". . . this case involves . . . the exercise of the Mayor’s First Amendment right and duty under the Charter to advocate to the public in general on behalf of a policy change that he believes is in the best interest of District citizens." (http://www.dcwatch.com/election2000/charter28.htm)

The Corporation Counsel is the official attorney of the Government of the District of Columbia, and it is his duty to represent the position and interests of the government. In this appeal, Mr. Rigsby opposes the official position of the District of Columbia, as represented by the Office of Campaign Finance, in the interest of one government official, Mayor Williams.

DCWatch has asked the Bar Counsel to investigate this action by the Corporation Counsel, to admonish him to terminate his representation of Mr. Williams in this case, and to impose whatever sanctions it finds appropriate.

Dorothy Brizill commented on the ethics complaint: "Mr. Williams thinks it is his right to use public funds and government employees in his election campaigns, and he thinks it is his right to use the government’s lawyer as his private attorney. But Mr. Rigsby should have a clearer understanding of his legal and ethical duty to the government and the people of the District of Columbia. I am calling upon the Bar Counsel to assist him to understand that duty."