Could a district judge continue serving as guardian of two veterans?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1977. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A district judge asked whether the judge could continue as guardian of two veterans described in the request as incompetent.
The Commission quoted Canon 5(D) and allowed continuation only while the role did not interfere with proper performance of judicial duties. It said the judge would have to resign the guardian role if interference arose, and failure to do so would breach the Canons.
Currency note
This opinion is indexed as 1977, after the Alabama Supreme Court’s 1975 adoption of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. Subsequent amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Canons and linked opinion before relying on its conclusions.
Common questions
Q: Did the Commission permit continuation as guardian?
A: Yes, while the guardianships did not interfere with judicial duties.
Q: What did the Commission say if interference arose?
A: The judge would have to resign the guardian role; failure to do so would breach the Canons.
Background and rules framework
The letter quotes Canon 5(D), which conditions a judge’s service as guardian or another fiduciary on its not interfering with proper performance of judicial duties.
Citations and references
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:
- Canon 5,(D)
See also
- AL Judicial Ethics Op. 77-19: Circuit Judge as Veteran Guardian
- AL Judicial Ethics Op. 77-18: Estate Trustee and Guardian
Source
- Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
- Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 77-15
- Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
77-15
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
February 3, 1977
On January 6, 1977, you requested an advisory opinion of this Commission regarding the propriety of your continuing to serve as Guardian of two incompetent Veterans in your present position as District Judge. ADVISORY OPINION Canon 5,(D), Canons of Judicial Ethics, provides as follows: “A judge should not serve as executor, administrator, guardian, or other fiduciary, if such service will interfere with the proper performance of his judicial duties....” It is the opinion of this Commission that you may continue to serve in this capacity, but only so long as such service will not interfere with the proper performance of your judicial duties. If this should interfere with your duties you would be compelled to resign and your failure to do so would constitute a breach of the Canons. Very truly yours, JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1977. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace