Advisory Opinion No. 98-81

Re: Linn F. Freedman, Esq.

QUESTION PRESENTED

An applicant for a position with the Department of the Attorney General, a state employee position, as an attorney with responsibilities for participating in the review of proposed hospital conversions, affiliations and mergers, inquires as to what, if any, restrictions under the Code of Ethics may affect her seeking and/or holding said position given that her spouse is a physician in private practice who has admitting and operating privileges at a hospital owned by a corporation that has had, and likely will have in the future, conversion matters subject to review by the Department of the Attorney General.

RESPONSE

It is the opinion of the Rhode Island Ethics Commission that the Petitioner, an applicant for a position with the Department of the Attorney General, a state employee position, may accept employment with the Department of the Attorney General. The Petitioner is an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Rhode Island. She is an applicant for a position with the Department of the Attorney General in which her primary responsibilities would be to participate in reviews of proposed hospital conversions, affiliations, mergers and other matters pursuant to recently enacted legislation, the Hospital Conversions Act. The Petitioner’s husband is a physician in private practice in the State who has admitting and operating privileges at Newport Hospital, which is affiliated with Lifespan Corporation. Lifespan Corporation has affiliation with a number of other hospitals and medical care facilities in the State. The Petitioner’s husband is not an employee of either the Newport Hospital or Lifespan and does not receive any form of compensation from those entities. While he currently serves on a hospital committee, he would resign from that position if his wife becomes employed by the Attorney General.

The Code of Ethics prohibits public officials and employees from taking public action when they have a private interest in substantial conflict with their public duties and responsibilities. R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(a). The law defines “substantial interest” as the reasonable likelihood that the official or employee, a member of his or her family, or a business associate will derive a direct financial gain by reason of his or her official action. R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-7(a). Here, a hospital at which the Petitioner’s husband has admitting and operating privileges may receive a residual benefit or detriment because of actions taken by the Department of the Attorney, and in which the Petitioner would participate. The limited nature of the relationship between the Petitioner’s spouse and the hospital does not rise to the level of a business association under the Code of Ethics. Further, we conclude that the potential for the benefit or detriment to the hospital affecting the Petitioner’s spouse, and thereby constituting a substantial interest under the law, is too remote and speculative to trigger prohibitions under the Code of Ethics. Therefore, the Petitioner may accept employment with the Department of the Attorney General and participate in the review of matters by that office under the Hospital Conversions Act.

Code Citations:

36-14-2

36-14-5(a)

36-14-7(a)

Related Advisory Opinions:

95-12

Keywords:

Business associate

Compensation

Family: Private Employer/ment