What did the Commission say a judge should do when an appearing lawyer’s Alabama license had lapsed?

Plain-English summary

A judge asked about a lawyer whose Alabama license had lapsed while the lawyer sought reinstatement. The lawyer was licensed elsewhere. The judge asked whether to let the lawyer finish pending cases or require association with another Alabama bar member.

The Commission limited its answer to the judicial Canons. It cited Canon 3B(2) and (3) and said the judge should take whatever legal steps were necessary to ensure lawyers appearing before the court were properly licensed under §34-3-1 of the Alabama Code.

The opinion also quoted then-existing DR 3-10-(A) against aiding unauthorized practice. It did not select either specific procedural option posed by the judge.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, 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 pick one of the two proposed case-management options?

A: No. It directed the judge to take necessary legal steps to ensure proper licensure.

Q: What judicial provisions did it cite?

A: Canon 3B(2) and (3) on court staff standards and appropriate disciplinary measures for known unprofessional conduct.

Background and rules framework

The opinion cites Canon 3B(2) and 3B(3), §34-3-1, Code of Alabama, 1975, and DR 3-10-(A) of the then-applicable Alabama Code of Professional Responsibility.

Citations and references

Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

• Canon 3B(2)
• Canon 3B(3)

Other authorities cited:

• §34-3-1, Code of Alabama, 1975, on licensure as cited.
• DR 3-10-(A), Code of Professional Responsibility, on aiding unauthorized practice.

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 90-390: Trial Judge and Bar Grievance

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 89-372
• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

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

89-372
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
May 1, 1989
The Judicial Inquiry Commission has considered your request for an opinion concerning whether a judge should take certain actions toward an attorney, whose Alabama license to practice law has lapsed and who is now in the process of seeking reinstatement. The attorney is licensed in another state. Your inquiry concerns whether the judge should allow the attorney to conclude cases in which he is involved or should the judge require the attorney to associate another member of the bar. The advisory opinion authority of the Commission extends only to advising judges on the application of the Canons of Judicial Ethics. Canon 3B(2) and (3) sets standards for a judge to follow in administering proceedings before him. That Canon requires that: (2) A judge should require his staff and court officials subject to his direction and control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to him. (3) A judge should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against a judge or lawyer for unprofessional conduct of which the judge has personal knowledge. Therefore, pursuant to this Canon, a judge should take whatever legal steps which may be necessary to assure that attorneys appearing before him are properly licensed pursuant to §34-3-1, Code of Alabama, 1975. Further, we note that DR 3-10-(A) of the Code of Professional Responsibility for Alabama attorneys requires that: “A lawyer should not aid a non-lawyer in the unauthorized practice of law.” Judges should also adhere to this standard in carrying out their responsibilities under Canon 3B of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. Sincerely, JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION