Could a new judge receive installments for former firm property and earned profits while recusing from the firm’s cases?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1986. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Before taking the bench, the judge agreed to sell an interest in the former firm’s property and collect earned but unpaid partnership profits. The judge expected to complete settlement in about a year and planned to recuse from the firm’s cases while amounts remained owed.
The Commission found no Canons conflict in the described arrangement. It said Canon 5C and Canon 3C had to be reconsidered if payment continued beyond the estimated or reasonably extended period, because debts owed by former partners kept disqualification concerns alive.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1986, 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 the planned settlement itself prohibited?
A: No. The Commission found no Canons violation on the stated roughly one-year arrangement.
Q: What if the former partners remained indebted beyond a reasonable period?
A: The opinion said Canon 5 had to be reconsidered and disqualification concerns continued.
Background and rules framework
The opinion quotes Canon 5C(1) and (3) on financial dealings and managing interests to minimize disqualification, together with Canon 3C.
Citations and references
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:
- Canon 5C
- Canon 3C
- Canon 5C(1)
- Canon 5C(3)
See also
Source
- Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
- Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 86-248
- Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
86-248
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
January 10, 1986
The Judicial Inquiry Commission has considered your request for an opinion concerning whether, under the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, a certain disposition and settlement of a judge’s interest in his old law firm and joint interest with his old law partners is appropriate. Under the facts presented, the judge and a former law partner jointly own the land and building in which the law firm is housed. Prior to assuming the bench in November of 1985, the judge agreed to dispose of his interest in the land and building by sale to three members of the firm. The payments for the purchase of the judge’s interest will be made in two installments. One installment is to be paid in 1985 and one in 1986. A further agreement was reached concerning the judge’s share or law partnership profits earned but not paid prior to the judge’s assuming the bench. Under this agreement, the judge will share in the partnership profits for work completed prior to his assuming the bench. The judge estimates that it will take approximately one year in order to complete all of these financial settlements with his former law partners. He will disqualify himself from all cases in which any member of his former law firm is involved so long as he expects to receive any monetary settlements from these arrangements. It is the opinion of the Commission that the described financial settlements do not run afoul of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. However, should the financial settlements not be completed within the estimated time or reasonably thereafter, the judge should be mindful of the provisions of Canon 5C in conjunction with Canon 3C of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. Canon 3C governs disqualification and Canon 5C concerns financial activities. More particularly Canon 5C(l) and Canon 5C(3) provide as follows: 5C(l) A judge should refrain from financial and business dealings that tend to reflect adversely on his impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of his judicial duties, or exploit his judicial position. 5C(3) A judge should manage his investments and other financial interests to minimize the number of cases in which he is disqualified. Under these Canons a new judge should manage his financial settlement with his old law firm in order to minimize the number of cases in which the judge is disqualified. So long as the partnership or its members are indebted to the judge, considerations of disqualification remain. 86-248 Page 2 Therefore, should the financial settlements not be completed within a reasonable period of time, i.e., approximately one year, Canon 5 must again be considered. Sincerely, JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1986. 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