May a judge use state bailiff funds to pay an eighteen-year-old daughter who has volunteered in the judge’s office?

Plain-English summary

A judge asked whether state funds designated for a bailiff could be used to pay an eighteen-year-old daughter who had volunteered as a clerk and bailiff.

The Commission concluded that the proposed payment violated Canon 3B(4), because payment would require the judge to appoint the daughter as bailiff. It read the Canon’s merit and anti-nepotism language together with a quoted Alabama prohibition on appointing a fourth-degree relative to a state job.

The PDF contains inconsistent section numbers for that statute: the discussion refers to “Section 41-1-15,” while the quoted text is headed “Section 41-1-5.” The opinion also cites Advisory Opinions 76-13 and 86-250.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1990, 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: Could the judge pay the daughter from bailiff funds?

A: No. The Commission said the necessary appointment would violate Canon 3B(4) under its analysis.

Q: Did her prior volunteer work change the answer?

A: No. The opinion noted that work but still rejected the paid appointment.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Canon 3B(4) and the Alabama anti-nepotism statute as printed, with inconsistent section numbers in its own text. It relies on Advisory Opinion 76-13 and cites Advisory Opinion 86-250.

Citations and references

Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

• Canon 3B(4)

Other authorities cited:

• Alabama JIC Advisory Opinion 76-13, appointment of a relative.
• Alabama JIC Advisory Opinion 86-250, cited on the appointment rule.

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 90-401: Daughter as Firm Clerk

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 90-394
• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

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

90-394
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
April 3, 1990
The Judicial Inquiry Commission has considered your request for an opinion concerning whether under the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics a judge may compensate his eighteen-year-old daughter with state funds set aside for the hiring of a bailiff. The judge’s daughter has previously worked as volunteer performing the duties of a clerk and bailiff in the judge’s office. It is the opinion of the Commission that the activity described would violate Canon 3B(4) of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics as previously applied by the Commission. In order for the judge’s daughter to be compensated with funds provided for payment of a bailiff, she would have to first be appointed bailiff by the judge. In Advisory Opinion 76-13, this Commission advised that such an appointment violates Canon 3B(4) as read in light of [Section 41-1-15, Code of Alabama, 1975.] Those provisions are as follows: Canon 3B(4) “A judge should not make unnecessary appointments. He should exercise his power of appointment only on the basis of merit, avoiding nepotism and favoritism.” Section 41-1-5 “No officer ... of the state ... shall appoint any person related to him within the fourth degree of affinity or consanguinity to any job, position, or office of profit with the state or any of its agencies ...” Read together, these provisions prohibit a judge from appointing a relative within the fourth degree as a bailiff or clerk. See also Advisory Opinion 86-250. Sincerely, JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION