Could a judge write bar commissioners in support of a disbarred lawyer’s reinstatement?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1980. 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 judge asked whether a letter supporting a disbarred lawyer’s reinstatement would violate Canon 2. An earlier Commission answer had treated the letter as prohibited voluntary character testimony. The Alabama Supreme Court then amended Canon 2C and its commentary.
The Commission concluded that the judge could send the letter to the Board of Bar Commissioners if the disbarred attorney would not be engaged in proceedings ordinarily before the judge, and it overruled its contrary earlier answer. The PDF marks Opinion 80-84 as overruled at least in part by Opinion 86-269, which later said the limitation turned on the letter’s recipient, not automatically on the lawyer supported.
Currency note
The official PDF marks this opinion “[Overruled, at least in part by 86-269].”
This opinion was issued in 1980, 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: What change led to the 1980 answer?
A: The Alabama Supreme Court amended Canon 2C and its commentary to allow some personal recommendation letters.
Q: What condition did Opinion 80-84 state?
A: It conditioned the letter on the disbarred attorney not being engaged in proceedings ordinarily before the judge.
Q: What later treatment does the PDF report?
A: The PDF marks 80-84 overruled at least in part by Opinion 86-269.
Background and rules framework
The letter applies Canon 2 and Canon 2C after the Supreme Court’s May 7, 1980 amendment. The official PDF marks the 1980 answer overruled at least in part by 86-269.
Citations and references
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:
- Canon 2
- Canon 2C
See also
Source
- Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
- Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 80-84
- Later modifying opinion: Advisory Opinion 86-269
- Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
80-84
[Overruled, at least in part by 86-269]
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
June 30, 1980
On March 13, 1980, you requested an advisory opinion from the Commission regarding whether a judge may, at the request of a disbarred attorney, submit a letter to the Board of Bar Commissioners in support of the attorney’s application for reinstatement. You specifically asked if the letter would be in violation of Canon 2 of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. Subsequently, the Commission issued an advisory opinion on March 21, 1980 stating that such a letter would be in the nature of voluntary testimony as a character witness and, as such, would be prohibited by Canon 2 C. On May 7, 1980, the Supreme Court of Alabama amended Canon 2 C of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics by adding as follows: “...at any hearing before any courts, or judicial or governmental commission.” The Supreme Court of Alabama also added to the Commentary of Canon 2: “...This canon does not per se prohibit a judge from writing a letter of recommendation disclosing personal information of someone’s experience, character or ability. Such letter, however, should not be written if the recipient is engaged in litigation before the judge or it is likely that the recipient will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the court.” It is the opinion of the Commission that it is permissible for a judge to submit a letter to the Board of Bar Commissioners in support of an attorney’s application for reinstatement at the request of a disbarred attorney provided the disbarred attorney will not be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the court. Our previous opinion to the contrary is hereby specifically overruled, due to amendment of Canon 2 by the Alabama Supreme Court.
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1980. 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