Must a judge recuse whenever a party is a grocery chain employing the judge’s daughter?

Plain-English summary

A judge asked whether proceedings involving a retail grocery chain that employed the judge’s daughter required disqualification.

The Commission said the employment alone did not require recusal. Canon 3C governed, and other circumstances could require it. As an example, the Commission recalled an earlier ruling requiring disqualification when the outcome of litigation would affect a judge’s child’s salary or income.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1982, 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: Was employment by the party alone enough?

A: No. The Commission said that fact alone did not require the judge’s disqualification.

Q: What additional fact did it identify?

A: It cited a prior ruling requiring recusal when the litigation’s outcome would affect the child’s salary or income.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Canon 3C and describes a prior Commission ruling about a judge’s child’s income, without identifying that ruling by opinion number.

Citations and references

Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

• Canon 3C

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 82-134: Judge’s Child in Counsel’s Office

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 82-133
• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

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

82-133
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
March 2, 1982
The Judicial Inquiry Commission has considered your request for an opinion concerning whether a judge must disqualify himself in proceedings involving a retail grocery chain which employs the judge’s daughter. It is the opinion of the Commission that the mere fact that a judge’s daughter is employed by a retail grocery chain does not require the judge to disqualify himself in a proceeding in which the retail grocery chain is involved. However, other circumstances could be such that the judge’s disqualification is required. As you are aware, disqualification is governed by Canon 3C of the Canons of Judicial Ethics. Of course, disqualification is required in all of the specific instances set out in that Canon. For instance, the Commission has previously ruled that disqualification is required where the outcome of pending litigation will affect the salary or income of a child of the presiding judge. There may also be other instances where the employment of the judge’s child by a party to the litigation will require recusal when considered with other circumstances. Such circumstances are too numerous to be listed here. However, should you desire to present other facts and circumstances to the Commission, the Commission will be happy to consider them. Very truly yours,