QUESTION: Attorney is licensed in Missouri and represents a party adverse to a corporate defendant. The lawsuit is filed in another state in which Attorney has been admitted as a visiting attorney. Attorney wants to conduct an ex parte interview of a former employee of the corporate defendant who resides in Missouri. The rules of the other state would permit such an interview. May Attorney conduct the interview? ANSWER: As long as all of the proceeding will be litigated under the jurisdiction of the courts of the other state, Attorney may follow the rules and rulings of the other state regarding Rule 4-4.2. However, the rulings which Attorney follows must be official interpretations of a court or disciplinary authority.

QUESTION: Attorney is practicing as a visiting attorney in a case in a jurisdiction in which Attorney is not licensed. Attorney would like to make ex parte contact with former employees of the opposing corporate party. The former employees were not upper level management but may have been lower or middle level management. The former employees were not involved in the occurrence giving rise to the suit. The rules of the jurisdiction in which the suit will be heard may allow such contact. If Attorney may not contact the former employees directly, may Attorney´s client discuss the matter with the former employees if Attorney does not "coach" the client. ANSWER: If the former employees were management at any level, Attorney may not engage in ex parte contact with those employees. If the former employees were not management, the remainder of the analysis set out in the comment to Rule 4-4.2 must be performed. If the client engages in ex parte communications with the former employees, Attorney will not be violating Rule 4-8.4 by having another person do what the attorney may not do if Attorney has not, in any way, expressly or impliedly indicated to the client that he should engage in such communication. Because Attorney is licensed in Missouri, the Missouri rules will apply under Rule 4-8.5 although the case is in another jurisdiction.