Skip top navigation Skip to content

Print   Email  Share

A. Introduction

EEOC attorneys, as counsel for an agency of the Federal Government, must at all times conduct themselves in an ethical and professional manner. See, e.g., Freeport-McMoran Oil & Gas Co. v. FERC, 962 F.2d 45 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (finding that lawyer representing government agency had more stringent obligation to end "easily resolvable" litigation); United States v. Witmer, 835 F. Supp. 208, 214-15 (M.D. Pa. 1993) (“government attorney must be held to a higher standard than private attorney"); Silverman v. Ehrlich Beer Corp., 687 F. Supp. 67, 69-70 (S.D.N.Y. 1987) (in awarding attorney’s fees against NLRB for bringing contempt action without investigating employer’s compliance, court said that lawyer for government in civil litigation is held to higher standard than ordinary lawyer); see also Reid v. INS, 949 F.2d 287, 288 (9th Cir. 1991) (admission of error by government lawyer appropriate where government lawyer in civil litigation has interest "only in the law being observed, not in victory or defeat").* As these authorities indicate, courts generally expect a higher level of ethical behavior from Federal Government attorneys than from attorneys representing private clients.


* Restatement (Third) of The Law Governing Lawyers § 97 cmt. f (2000) provides in part:

A government lawyer may occasionally bear special disabilities or obligations because of responsibility to maintain public trust in government. Thus, courts and disciplinary agencies commonly apply more exacting standards of conduct for government lawyers and occasionally exercise discretion to impose harsher sanctions when a violation of such standards is found (see also Comment h hereto [and Reporter’s Note to cmt. h]).