ETHICS OPINION 226
NUMBER 226 1924
Question. In the opinion of the Committee, is it proper for an attorney, who has been a referee in a foreclosure suit, to accept a retainer from one of the parties to the action, after the action has terminated, for the purpose of securing the surplus moneys arising from the sale and deposited by the referee, pursuant to law, with a public official to await the establishment of the right to such surplus?
Answer. The question does not disclose that the referee exercised any judicial functions; the Committee assumes that his function was ministerial and that he was a referee to sell; the Committee does not consider that the acceptance of the employment is improper. If he had exercised judicial functions in the foreclosure suit, new considerations would arise upon which the Committee expresses no present opinion.