Judicial Conduct Flashcards
A judge at a judicial conference went for drinks at a bar with three other judges. Making his way back to the hotel on foot after several drinks, a drunken passerby approaches the judge and launches into an expletive-filled rant about the judge and the judge’s family. The judge takes a swing at the passerby and misses, but they end up in a brawl.
Is the judge subject to discipline? (B)
Yes, because the judge acted in a manner that reflected adversely on his temperament and fitness.
The judge is subject to discipline because the judge’s actions gave the appearance of impropriety. An “appearance of impropriety” arises when a judge’s conduct would create a reasonable perception that he has violated the CJC or acted in some other manner that reflects adversely on his honesty, impartiality, temperament, or fitness as a judge. Engaging in a drunken brawl reflects adversely on the judge’s temperament and fitness.
A state court judge typically presides over civil tort suits and an occasional breach of contract action. A shareholder suit against a corporation that involves very complex business transactions is assigned to the judge. She doesn’t feel comfortable with her understanding of that area of law and asks a fellow judge with more transactional experience out for coffee to discuss it.
Is the judge subject to discipline? (B)
No, because it is appropriate for a judge to consult with another judge.
A judge may consult about a matter with other judges and with other court personnel whose function is to aid the judge in carrying out adjudicative responsibilities. The judge must, however, make reasonable efforts to avoid receiving factual information that isn’t part of the record and must not abrogate her responsibility to decide the matter.
A corporation in which Judge Kim’s first cousin sits on the board of directors appears as a party in Judge Kim’s courtroom.
Must Judge Kim disqualify himself? (B)
No.
Judge Kim need not disqualify himself from the case. While the rule is that the judge must disqualify himself if a relative within the third degree is a party or an officer, director, general partner, managing partner, or trustee of a party, a first cousin doesn’t come within that relationship under the CJC. The rule applies to the judge’s great-grandparents, grandparents, parents, uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, nieces, and nephews—not cousins.
A limited partnership in which Judge Janine’s aunt works as an administrative assistant appears as a party in Judge Janine’s courtroom.
Must Judge Janine disqualify herself? (B)
No.
Judge Janine need not disqualify herself. A judge must disqualify herself if a relative within the third degree is a party or an officer, director, general partner, managing partner, or trustee of a party. Her aunt is a relative in the third degree but is not a general or managing partner. A judge must also disqualify herself if the judge’s spouse, domestic partner, parent, or child (wherever residing), or any other member of the judge’s family who resides in the judge’s household has an economic interest in the outcome. The judge’s aunt who works at the partnership is not one of the relatives covered by this rule.
A lawyer who Judge Javier mentored before Judge Javier was appointed to the bench appears as a lawyer in a case in Judge Javier’s courtroom.
Must Judge Javier disqualify himself? (B)
Yes.
Judge Javier must disqualify himself from the case. A judge must disqualify himself if there is a reasonable ground to believe that the judge has a personal bias concerning a party or a party’s lawyer. Here, it would be reasonable to believe that Judge Javier would have a personal bias in favor of the lawyer with whom he shared a mentor-protégé relationship, and he must disqualify himself.
Judge Jemma belongs to and is very active in her church. Her church has a congregation of only 100 members. A member of Judge Jemma’s church congregation appears as a party in Judge Jemma’s courtroom. Judge Jemma has no contact with this member outside of church functions.
Must Judge Jemma disqualify herself from the case? (B)
No.
Judge Jemma need not disqualify herself. Unlike friends, acquaintances appearing as parties do not require a judge to disqualify herself from the case. Fellow church congregants are acquaintances.
Judge Jordan and lawyer Paulo have mutual friends and have met and chatted at various gatherings at the homes of their mutual friends. Paulo appears as a lawyer in a case in Judge Jordan’s courtroom.
Must Judge Jordan disqualify himself from the case? (B)
No.
Judge Jordan need not disqualify himself. Unlike friends, acquaintances appearing as parties do not require a judge to disqualify himself from the case. People who see each other socializing with mutual friends are acquaintances.
Judge Juanita and Poppy, a distant cousin, vacation together twice a year and see each other socially nearly every weekend. Poppy appears as a party in a lawsuit in Judge Juanita’s courtroom.
Must Judge Juanita disqualify herself? (B)
Yes.
Judge Juanita must disqualify herself from hearing the case. Although Poppy is not within the degree of relationship that would require the judge to disqualify herself on that basis, she does qualify as a close friend. A close personal relationship of this kind is a reasonable ground to believe that the judge has a personal bias concerning a party, and the judge must disqualify herself.
Prior to Judge Jesse being appointed to the bench, his firm worked on a case for X-Corp. Judge Jesse had no involvement in the case. The X-Corp case is now before Judge Jesse. Judge Jesse discloses on the record the reason for his disqualification. He then turns to the parties and asks whether they can agree that he should not be disqualified. Both parties agree to waive the disqualification.
May Judge Jesse properly remain on the case? (B)
No, because the parties were not permitted to meet privately outside the presence of Judge Jesse.
Jesse may not properly remain on the case because the grounds for disqualification were not properly waived. To remit (waive) grounds for disqualification, the judge disclosing the grounds on the record is only one step in the process. The lawyers must be able to consult privately with their clients, and the parties must be able to meet outside the presence of the judge. Here, the judge asked the parties for an immediate answer, depriving them of an opportunity to meet privately, outside his presence.
Judge Jun does not belong to a country club. His friend belongs to an exclusive golf club that does not permit women or gender nonconforming individuals to join. His friend invites the judge to a fundraiser for the children’s hospital at the country club. The event is open to everyone.
Is it proper for Judge Jun to attend? (B)
Yes, because the fundraiser is an isolated event that would not be construed as the judge endorsing the club’s practices.
A judge may attend an event in a facility of an organization that engages in discriminatory practices if his attendance is an isolated event that could not reasonably be perceived as an endorsement of the organization’s practices.
Judge Jasper is a full-time state court judge. His best friend Bailey asked Jasper to draft a contract for him. Jasper took a couple of hours on the weekend and drafted the document as a favor to his friend.
Is Judge Jasper subject to discipline? (B)
Yes.
A full-time judge must not practice law. There is an exception for drafting documents or reviewing documents for a family member, but Bailey is not a family member. The fact that the judge drafted the document on the weekend and did not charge for it is immaterial.
Judge Jasmine is a full-time federal judge. The judge’s daughter is a public school teacher who is being let go from her job. Her daughter asks Judge Jasmine to attend the hearing on her termination as her lawyer.
May Judge Jasmine attend the hearing as a lawyer? (B)
No, because she is a full-time judge.
Judge Jasmine may not attend the hearing as her daughter’s lawyer. A full-time judge must not practice law. There is an exception for drafting documents or reviewing documents for a family member, but a judge can’t act as a family member’s lawyer in any forum.
Judge Julius is running for re-election against a strong opponent. It is expected to be a close race, and Julius would like to run some expensive ads that will require raising some campaign funds. Judge Julius sends out a form letter on campaign stationery to a list of past donors asking for contributions to his campaign.
Is Judge Julius subject to discipline? (B)
Yes.
Judge Julius is subject to discipline for soliciting campaign contributions. A judge or judicial candidate must not personally solicit or accept campaign contributions other than through a campaign committee.
Miko is a judge whose 17-year-old son is preparing to leave home. Her son was offered an internship with a tech startup beginning after high school graduation. He accepted the position but told Miko his plans were “a surprise.”
On Monday morning, Miko learns that she will be presiding over a highly publicized fraud case against the same startup. Her son tells her about the internship that night.
Must Miko disqualify herself from the case? (B)
Yes, because Miko’s son has an economic interest in the matter.
A judge must disqualify herself in a proceeding if she knows that she—or her spouse, domestic partner, parent, or child—has an economic interest in the matter or in one of the parties.
Tia is an attorney planning a grassroots run for judicial office, with her best friend Theo volunteering as her campaign manager. Theo sets out several strategies to start funding the campaign.
Which statements are correct under the CJC? (B)
Tia can ask friends and colleagues to donate what they can - incorrect
Tia can update Theo on campaign contribution limits in her state - correct
Tia can give any contributions she receives to Theo directly for investment in the campaign - incorrect
Theo must reject campaign contributions from lawyers who may appear before Tia if Tia is elected - incorrect
Theo can use campaign funds to print bumper stickers for supporters - correct
Tia can appear at a fundraiser that Theo coordinates and oversees - correct
Theo can host a free meet-and-greet in the courthouse after business hours - incorrect
Tia updating Theo on campaign contribution limits, Theo purchasing bumper stickers for supporters, and Tia appearing at a fundraiser coordinated by Theo are permitted under the Rules. Tia asking friends for donations and giving funds to Theo for investment in the campaign are improper because a judge or judicial candidate must not personally solicit or accept campaign contributions. Rather, a judicial candidate running in a public election may establish a campaign committee to manage and conduct her campaign. The candidate is responsible for ensuring that her committee complies with the CJC and applicable fundraising laws and must direct the committee not to solicit or accept donations above contribution limits. Therefore, it is proper for Tia to update Theo on campaign contribution limits. It is proper for a campaign committee to accept reasonable campaign contributions from lawyers who may appear before the candidate if the candidate is successful. The candidate should, however, instruct her campaign committee to be especially cautious in connection with such contributions, so they don’t create grounds for disqualification if the candidate is elected. Purchasing bumper stickers is a permitted use of campaign funds. A campaign committee may coordinate a candidate fundraiser or meet-and-greet, so it would be proper for Tia to appear at Theo’s fundraiser. However, the Rules prohibit the use of court staff, facilities, or other court resources in a judicial campaign, so it would be improper for Theo to use the courthouse for a meet-and-greet.
Judge R discovered his estranged wife in an automobile with another
man. The judge broke the car window (causing the other man to be cut with broken glass) and slapped his estranged wife. Is Judge R subject to discipline? (B)
Judge R is subject to discipline, even though his conduct was unconnected with his judicial duties.
A judge must comply with the law (including the CJC). [CJC Rule 1.1] A judge must avoid even the appearance of impropriety. At all times a judge must act so as to promote public confidence in the independence, integrity, and
impartiality of the judiciary.
While driving under the influence of alcohol, Judge L ran a traffic signal
and violated other traffic laws. Is Judge L subject to disciple.
Yes.
What is the test for an “appearance of impropriety”? (B)
An “appearance of impropriety” arises when a judge’s conduct would create a reasonable perception that she has violated the CJC or acted in some other
manner that reflects adversely on her honesty, impartiality, temperament, or fitness as a judge. [CJC Rule 1.2, comment 5
When can a personal reference from a judge be on official letterhead? (B)
Such a communication may
be on official letterhead if: (1) the judge indicates that the reference is
personal; and (2) there is no likelihood that use of the letterhead would reasonably be perceived as an attempt to use the judicial office to exert pressure. [CJC Rule 1.3, comment 2]
When Judge B was stopped for a routine traffic violation, he imperiously informed the traffic officer: “I am a judge in this town, young man, and I don’t take kindly to being stopped for petty reasons!”
Is Judge B subject to discipline? (B)
Yes.
A judge must not abuse, or permit others to abuse, the prestige of her
office to advance her personal or economic interests or those of others. [CJC Rule 1.3]
Judge C used her official court stationery when writing to a building contractor with whom she was having a personal contract dispute. Is Judge C subject to discipline? (B)
Yes.
Official letterhead can only be used for personal references.
When Judge D’s teenage daughter was charged with shoplifting,
Judge D called Judge E, to whom the daughter’s case was assigned. D
said: “E, as a fellow judge, I want to tell you that my little girl is a good kid who deserves a break.
Is Judge D subject to discipline? (B)
Yes.
A judge must not abuse, or permit others to abuse, the prestige of her
office to advance her personal or economic interests or those of others. [CJC Rule 1.3]
Judge F writes materials and gives lectures for a proprietary continuing legal education company. What should he do to avoid exploitation of his judicial office? (B)
Judge F should retain control over the company’s advertisements of his materials and lectures to avoid exploitation of his judicial office. [CJC Rule 1.3, comment 4]
A judge must not abuse, or permit others to abuse, the prestige of her
office to advance her personal or economic interests or those of others. [CJC Rule 1.3]
Judge P’s elderly, infirm sister needs a custodian to look after her personal and financial affairs.
Should judge P undertake this responsibility? (B)
No. Judge P should not undertake this responsibility if it will
interfere with the proper performance of her judicial duties.
Judicial duties include all the duties of the judge’s office that are prescribed by law. Judicial duties take precedence over all of the judge’s other activities, including personal and nonjudicial activities. [CJC Rule 2.1]
Judge U took a case under submission. While reading the transcript and pondering her decision, she became puzzled about the testimony of witness W. To save time and effort, Judge U simply telephoned W and asked him to clarify the point that puzzled her.
Is Judge U’s conduct improper?
Yes.
A judge must not independently investigate the facts in a case and must consider only the evidence presented. This prohibition extends to information available in all mediums, including electronic research (e.g., Internet research). [CJC Rule 2.9(C) and comment 6]
During the trial of a state criminal case, Judge V ordered the State
Governor to appear as a witness and to bring certain documents that the Governor claimed were protected as government secrets. The State Attorney General sought a writ of prohibition from the appellate court to block Judge V’s order. At that point, Judge V made a public statement that “the Governor apparently has a lot to hide. Is Judge V subject to discipline? (B)
Maybe. ” If Judge V’s statement
might reasonably be expected to impair the fairness of the proceedings, Judge V is subject to discipline.
