CEO 75-44 -- March 6, 1975

PUBLIC OFFICERS

LAW FIRM REPRESENTING THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER AND THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD

To: John P. McKeever, Attorney, Ocala

Prepared by: Patricia Butler

SUMMARY:

School board attorneys or attorneys for the county property appraiser are not designated as public officers within s. 112.312(7)(i), F. S., as amended by Ch. 74- 177, Laws of Florida. In accordance with the accepted maxim that the expression of one is the exclusion of the others, such representation by Mr. McKeever's law firm of the Marion County School Board and County Property Appraiser does not create public officer status for members of that firm. Such representation does not come within the county attorney classification since Marion County has such position separately designated and filled. Further, attorneys representing the Marion County School Board and Property Appraiser, among other clients, are not employees of the county but are independent contractors. See CEO 74-6. Thus, the members of the firm are not subject to the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees.

QUESTIONS:

1. Are the members of the law firm of Patillo, McKay and McKeever, P.A., which represents the Marion County School Board and the Marion County Property Appraiser, public officers within the meaning of part III, Ch. 112, F. S., as amended by Ch. 74-177, Laws of Florida, and therefore subject to the disclosure provisions and standards of conduct applicable to public officers?

2. Are the members of the law firm of Patillo, McKay, and McKeever, P.A., which represents the Marion County School Board and the Marion County Property Appraiser, employees of an agency within the meaning of part III, Ch. 112, supra, and therefore subject to the disclosure provisions and standards of conduct applicable to employees of agencies?

Question 1 is answered in the negative.

The term "public officer" is defined by law to include, among others, "county attorneys." Section 112.312(7)(i), supra. But nowhere in the statutory definition of this phrase are school board attorneys or attorneys for the county property appraiser designated as public officers. The familiar maxim of statutory construction that the expression of one is the exclusion of others leads us to conclude that such representations do not create public officer status for the purposes of this law. Neither do we find such representations to fall within the "county attorney" classification, since the duties of that position are assigned to Mr. Robert Ryder, the attorney for Marion County.

Question 2 also is answered in the negative.

It is assumed that the Marion County School Board and the Marion County Property Appraiser are but two of a number of clients of the firm of Patillo, McKay, and McKeever, P.A. In both cases, the firm receives an annual retainer and bills the client for specific services at an hourly rate.

In previous opinions we have held that attorneys representing clients are generally not considered employees of these clients. Rather, such attorneys are deemed to hold the status of independent contractors. See CEO 74-6, a copy of which is enclosed. Under the criteria set forth in that opinion, we consider your law firm to be squarely within the independent contractor category. Thus, the members of the firm are not considered to be employees of an agency and are not required to comply with the requirements set forth for employees of agencies.