May a local bar foundation pay juror costs to preserve a circuit court’s jury-trial schedule?

Plain-English summary

A circuit court faced cutting jury-trial weeks because it lacked funds for juror expenses. A local bar foundation considered supplying the shortfall. The foundation received gifts from varied sources, and no judge, court employee, or juror would know whether a particular lawyer had donated. The presiding judge was a foundation director but would not take part in the foundation's decision.

The Commission concluded that the canons permitted the proposal on those facts. It distinguished funding arrangements that linked a judge to identifiable local attorneys and raised a reasonable impartiality question. Here it found no such relationship or connection. It also found no appearance of impropriety or erosion of confidence under Canons 2 and 2A.

The opinion follows Advisory Opinion 03-826, which addressed foundation support for court positions during budget shortages.

In practice

The approval is tied to the described separation between the court and the identity of foundation donors, and to the presiding judge’s nonparticipation in the funding decision.

Common questions

Q: Does the opinion permit foundation funding of juror expenses?

A: Yes, on the stated facts.

Q: Would judges know which lawyers donated?

A: No. The proposal kept particular donor identities unknown to judges, court employees, and jurors.

Q: Did the presiding judge decide the foundation’s proposal?

A: No. The opinion states that the judge would not participate in the foundation’s consideration.

Background and rules framework

The Commission applies Canons 2 and 2A on appearance and confidence and Canon 3C(1) on possible disqualification from a connection with local attorneys.

Citations and references

Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

• Canons 2, 2A, and 3C(1)

Other opinions cited:

• Alabama Advisory Opinion 03-826, foundation funding for court positions

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 11-905: Judge’s Family Building and Attorney Tenant
• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 11-907: Reporting Lawyer Misconduct and Recusal

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 11-906

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION
DATE ISSUED: JUNE 17,2011 ADVISORY OPINION 11-906
CIRCUIT COURT'S ACCEPTANCE OF
FUNDS FROM BAR FOUNDAnON TO
MAINTAIN JURY WEEKS
DISQUALIFICATION: BAR
FOUNDAnON'S PROVISION OF FUNDS
TO CIRCUIT COURT
ISSUE
Do the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics
permit a local Bar Foundation to provide funds
to make up shortfalls in the circuit court's
budget for funding jury trials in the county
served by the Foundation? Answer: Yes, under
the facts presented.
FACTS
Due to current shortfalls in state and local
funding for courts, the circuit court is
confronting reduction of jury trials by half
because it does not have adequate funds to pay
juror expenses. The Bar Foundation in that
circuit mayhave funds to make up the shortfalls.
The Bar Foundation is exempt from income
taxes under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code. It pursues philanthropic gifts
and bequests from a variety of sources,
includinglawyers, law firms, and public-spirited
individuals and businesses. The Foundation
uses its resources to support "programs that
improve the legal system, the administration of
justice and otherwisepromotes thebetterment of
[the] community consistent with the charter of
the Foundation." The presiding circuit judge is
a member of the Board of Directors of the
Foundation, but will take no part in the
Foundation's consideration of any proposal.
Under the proposal contemplated, no judge,
judicial employee, orjurorwould know whether
funds were donated by any particular lawyer, by
local lawyers, or even by lawyers at all.
DISCUSSION
In asking whether the proposal would violate
the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, the
inquiring judge cites Advisory Opinion 03­
826, in which the Commission concluded the
canons permit contributions by a local Bar
Foundation to fund certain court positions,
e.g., court attendants and an assistant to the
court administrator, to avoid elimination of
those positions because ofbudget shortfalls.
The Commission noted the facts regarding
funding by the Bar Foundations differ from
those facts the Commission considered in
prior opinions where the Commission
advised that the provision offunds by a local
bar association to pay the salary ofa judicial
research assistant creates a connection
between the judge and local attorneys that
could cause the judge's impartiality to
reasonably be questioned, Canon 3C(l). No
such relationship or connection exists under
the facts presented by the inquiring judge.
In addition, in Advisory Opinion 03-826, the
Commission advised that Canons 2 and 2A
are not implicated by acceptance of funds
from the Foundation. The proposal presented
by the inquiring judge, ifimplemented, does
not create any appearance of impropriety or
erode confidence in the integrity and
impartiality ofthe judiciary. Thus, under the
facts presented, the Canons ofJudicial Ethics
do not prohibit funding juror costs by the
local Bar Foundation.
REFERENCES
Advisory Opinion 03-826 .
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, Canons
2, 2A, and 3C(l).
ADVISORY OPINION 11-906
PAGE 2
This opinion is advisory only and is based on
the specific facts and questions submitted by
the judge who requested the opinion pursuant
to Rule 18 of the Rules of Procedure of the
Judicial Inquiry Commission. For further
information, you may contact the Judicial
Inquiry Commission, P. O. Box 303400,
Montgomery, Alabama 36130-3400; tel.:
(334) 242-4089; fax: (334) 353-4043.