Ethics Opinion No. 151
Adopted November 30, 1950
May one who has been elevated to the office of County Judge in Oklahoma and who has assumed the duties and obligations of that judicial office complete unfinished legal practice while continuing to perform the judicial functions of said office?
The above presents a matter concerning which an actual opinion of the Ethics Committee of the Oklahoma Bar Association should not be rendered, since the authority of the Bar Association to speak under such circumstances is highly doubtful. It is thought, however, that the proposal is of doubtful propriety. See Section 1, Title 5, O.S.1941; Lilly v. State, 7 Okl.Cr. 284, 123 P. 575; Roddie v. State, 19 Okl.Cr. 63, 198 P. 342; Dixon v. State, 67 Okl.Cr. 365, 94 P.2d 258; State Bar of Oklahoma Yearbook, 1937, Title IV, Page 25; Opinion 34, State Bar of Oklahoma, Volume I, page 76.