May a judge accept a fee for legal work performed before taking office when payment becomes available nine years later?

Plain-English summary

Nine years after taking office, a judge learned that a bankruptcy estate had money to pay a fee for legal services performed before the judgeship.

The Commission held that the judge could accept the payment if a prior fee agreement existed. It relied on earlier opinions allowing remuneration for legal work done before assuming office.

The opinion noted a prior case with payment after seven years and another in which a prebench lawsuit concluded several years after the judge took office. It also repeated earlier advice to settle the amount owed, so far as possible, before assuming the bench.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998, 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 a fee after nine years?

A: Yes, if the fee was for legal work performed before office and a prior fee agreement existed.

Q: Did delayed payment itself change the holding?

A: No. The Commission applied earlier opinions that allowed delayed payment for prebench legal work.

Q: What did the opinion say about fixing the amount owed?

A: It quoted an earlier opinion that agreements on the amount owed should be settled insofar as possible before taking the bench.

Background and rules framework

The Commission relied on Advisory Opinions 81-114, 84-215, and 90-402 concerning compensation for legal work performed before judicial office. This opinion cites no numbered Canon provision.

Citations and references

Advisory Opinions 81-114, 84-215, and 90-402.

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 81-114: Payment for Prebench Legal Work

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 84-215: Prebench Contingent Fees

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 90-402: Settlement of Prebench Contingent Fee

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions

• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 98-699

• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

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

98-699
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
June 26, 1998
Judicial Inquiry Commission has considered your request for an advisory opinion whether a judge may accept a fee for legal services performed prior to his becoming a judge when it has been nine years since he took office. The judge has just been notified that a bankruptcy estate now has funds available to pay the fee. As you noted in your request for an opinion, the Commission has previously held that a judge may accept remuneration for legal services performed prior to his assuming office where a prior fee agreement exists. Advisory Opinions 81-114, 84-215, and 90-402. In Advisory Opinion 84-215, the Commission noted that agreements as to how much is owed the judge should be settled insofar as possible prior to the judge assuming the bench. In Advisory Opinion 81-114, a lawsuit the judge filed on behalf of a client before assuming the bench was not successfully concluded until several years after he became a judge. In Advisory Opinion 90-402, the lawsuit in question was not settled until seven years after the judge had assumed the bench. The previous opinions of the Commission control in the situation presented. It is the opinion of the Commission that a judge may accept a fee for legal services performed prior to his becoming a judge where a prior fee agreement exists. Yours truly, JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION