Did a proposed exchange of pending cases between two circuit divisions violate the Code of Judicial Conduct?

Plain-English summary

Two circuit judges planned to exchange division assignments and proposed transferring all then-pending cases between the divisions to maintain case continuity.

The Committee saw nothing in the proposed transfer that would violate the Code of Judicial Conduct. It said, however, that directing the clerk and managing the reassignment were essentially judicial-administration questions beyond the Committee’s ethics role.

In practice

The opinion identifies no judicial-ethics obstacle in the plan as described and leaves the administrative mechanics outside its review.

Common questions

Q: Did the Committee identify a Code violation?

A: No. It saw no Code impediment in the proposed exchange.

Q: Did it decide how the clerk should transfer the cases?

A: No. It treated that as judicial administration beyond its ethics jurisdiction.

Background and rules framework

The Committee considered the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct and limited its answer to ethics. The requesting judge cited Arkansas Supreme Court Administrative Order 14; the Committee quoted that reference without analyzing the order.

Citations and references

• Arkansas Supreme Court Administrative Order 14 (quoted in the opinion).

See also

No sibling opinions yet indexed.

Source

• Landing page: https://jddc.arkansas.gov/opinions/opinion-no-2002-07/

Original opinion text

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

September 03, 2002

Honorable John R. Scott

Benton County Courthouse

102 N.E. “A” Street, Box 12

Bentonville, AR 72712

RE: Advisory Opinion 2002-07

Dear Judge Scott:

In your letter of August 20, 2002, to the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, you ask whether ethical improprieties might arise from a proposed reassignment of cases in Divisions IV and V of the 19th Judicial Circuit West of Benton County, Arkansas. You state that your tenure as Circuit Judge of Division V began on October 1, 2001. Judge Xollie Duncan, who joins you in requesting this advisory opinion, presides over Division IV cases, Judge Duncan’s tenure having begun on September 11, 2000. On January 1, 2003, Judge Duncan and you will exchange positions and you will preside over Division IV and Judge Duncan over Division V.

You state that for a variety of reasons you and Judge Duncan believe it would greatly facilitate the efficient management of cases and enhance judicial economy for all cases pending on January 1, 2003 in Division IV to be transferred to Division V and vice versa. Specifically, you ask this committee whether you and Judge Duncan may ethically direct your circuit clerk to effectuate the transfer of cases consistent with your proposal.

-2-

Honorable John R. Scott September 03, 2002

_________

You note that the proposal would seem compatible with Administrative Order No. 14 of the Arkansas Supreme Court, which reads in part:

The creation of divisions shall in no way limit the powers and duties of the judges as circuit judges. Judges shall not be assigned exclusively to a particular division so as to preclude them from hearing other cases which may come before them.

We see nothing in the proposed reassignment of cases which, in the opinion of the committee, would impinge on the Code of Judicial Conduct. However, the issue is, we believe, essentially a matter of judicial administration rather than judicial ethics and would, therefore, exceed the purview of this committee.

Yours very truly,

Steele Hays

For the Committee