May a judge accept the medical society’s standard honorarium for delivering its banquet keynote?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1990. 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 medical society invited a judge to deliver its annual banquet keynote and offered its usual honorarium. The amount was the same as paid to prior keynote speakers who were not judges.
The Commission allowed the judge to accept the payment. It applied Canon 5A’s permission for speaking on nonlegal subjects if the activity did not detract from judicial dignity or interfere with duties, and Canon 6’s conditions on compensation and the source of payment.
The opinion emphasized that compensation should be reasonable and no higher than a nonjudge would receive for the same activity, and that the payment source should not appear to influence the judge or create an appearance of impropriety.
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 accept the society’s set honorarium?
A: Yes. The Commission noted it matched the amount paid to prior nonjudge speakers.
Q: What limits did the opinion cite?
A: Canons 5 and 6 addressed dignity, judicial duties, reasonable amount, comparable payment, and appearances of influence or impropriety.
Background and rules framework
The opinion quotes Alabama Canons 5A and 6A as well as the general Canon 6 compensation provision. It applies them to the described medical-society speech.
Citations and references
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:
- Canon 5
- Canon 5A
- Canon 6
- Canon 6A
See also
Source
- Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
- Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 90-404
- Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
90-404
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
September 26, 1990
The Judicial Inquiry Commission has considered your request for an opinion concerning whether under the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics a judge may accept an honorarium for delivering the keynote speech at the annual banquet of the medical society located in an urban county. The medical society has a set honorarium which it pays each year to the keynote speaker. It is this set honorarium which would be paid to the judge. It is the opinion of the Commission that the judge may accept an honorarium for delivering the keynote speech in question. This issue is governed by Canons 5 and 6 of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. These Canons provide in pertinent part as follows: Canon 5 A Judge Should Regulate His Extra-judicial Activities To Minimize the Risk of Conflict with His Judicial Duties A. Avocational Activities: A judge may write, lecture, teach, and speak on nonlegal subjects, and engage in the arts, sports, and other social and recreational activities, if such avocational activities do not detract from the dignity of his office or interfere with the performance of his judicial duties. Canon 6 A judge may receive compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the quasi- judicial and extra-judicial activities permitted by these canons, if the source of such payments does not give the appearance of influencing the judge in his judicial duties or otherwise give the appearance of impropriety, subject to the following restrictions: A. Compensation: Compensation should not exceed a reasonable amount, nor should it exceed what a person who is not a judge would receive for the same activity. 90-404 Page 2 These provisions clearly provide that a judge may receive an honorarium for delivering a keynote speech. In this instance, the honorarium is in the same amount as paid to past non-judge speakers. This is in compliance with the Canons. However, the judge should be ever mindful of these provisions and make sure that even the appearance of propriety remains intact. Sincerely, JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1990. 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