Who Does The County Attorney Work For?

My View by Jim Yacavone

If you follow the county commission you get the distinct impression that the two post commissioners, Larry Sosebee and Earl John­son, do not entirely trust the county attorney, Lynn Doss, because they are not sure who she works for. Is her cli­ent Commission Chairman Bill Simonds, the Board of Commission­ers as a whole or the three commissioners individually? 
Their concerns are understandable since the commission chairman, Bill Simonds, has the sole authority under Fannin County’s local legislation to hire and fire Doss and fix her com­pensation. That fact alone is enough to make one suspicious of where Doss’s loyalties lie.

Fortunately, the 2000 Georgia Supreme Court case of Vollrath v. Collins, a case which involved Doss, sheds light on who Doss’s clients are. The issue in the case was whether the Fannin County commission or the commission chairman has the authority to fire Doss. The court ultimately ruled that the Fannin County local legislation gives the chairman the sole power to hire or fire the county attorney.

In its decision that court commented that “the members of the board are clients” of the county attorney and that “each of the three commissioners may be entitled to request that Ms. Doss perform legal services on behalf of the county.” Thus, ac­cording to the Georgia Supreme Court, Doss works for each of the three commissioners individually. The implications are sig­nificant.

It means that each commissioner has the right can ask Doss to perform legal services such as research issues, draft pro­posed ordinances, and render legal advice. This could signifi­cantly increase what the county has to pay in attorney’s fees if individual commissioners use her services frequently. It also means that two commissioners cannot limit a third commis­sioner’s use of the county attorney because each of them is her client.

This arrangement raises ethical issues of client confiden­tiality and conflicts of interest. For example, if two commission­ers are on opposite sides of an issue and both request that Doss provide legal analysis to support their respective positions, Doss is compelled to walk a tight line to render fair and impartial ser­vice to both clients. In the course of representing two commis­sioners on opposite sides of an issue she may learn of facts, tac­tics or arguments from one commissioner that she cannot dis­close to the other commissioner because of client confidentiality.

All attorneys have an ethical obligation to act in good faith and render honest and impartial service to their clients. At present, if a post commissioner does not believe he is receiving such service from Doss, he lacks the authority to fire her. Thus, the post commissioner’s only recourse may be to file a grievance against Doss with the Georgia Bar.

Human nature being what it is, one must cynically ques­tion whether Doss can render fair, impartial and equal legal ser­vices to each of the three commissioners when one of them—the chairman—has the power to hire and fire her and fix her com­pensation.

There’s something wrong with this arrangement, and it needs to be fixed for the good of Fannin County.