Could a Maine judge continue serving on educational and charitable nonprofit boards?

Plain-English summary

A judge served on boards of educational and charitable nonprofits, including a school association, two foundations, and a youth center. He asked whether those board positions could continue. Source: Opinion 02-7.

The committee treated the organizations as nonprofits of the kind covered by Canon 4(C)(3). Based on the information available, it found no likelihood that they would have matters before the judge or frequently litigate in his court, so the canon did not bar the board service. Source: Opinion 02-7.

The committee emphasized the canon’s limits on personal fundraising, use of judicial prestige for solicitation, and service involving organizations likely to appear in court. If an organization later became involved in litigation before the judge, the opinion said he might disqualify himself under Canon 3(E). It permitted the described activities subject to those limits. Source: Opinion 02-7.

In practice

Under the facts presented, the committee allowed the judge to remain on the nonprofit boards, subject to the cited limitations on litigation and fundraising. Source: Opinion 02-7.

Common questions

Q: Could the judge remain on the four nonprofit boards?

A: Yes. The committee concluded the described service could continue under the facts presented and the stated limitations. Source: Opinion 02-7.

Q: Could the judge personally solicit funds for those organizations?

A: Canon 4(C)(3)(b)(i), quoted in the opinion, prohibited personal fundraising except solicitation of judges over whom the judge had no supervisory or appellate authority. Source: Opinion 02-7.

Q: What if one organization later litigated before the judge?

A: The committee said the judge might disqualify himself under Canon 3(E). Source: Opinion 02-7.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Maine Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 4(C)(3), including its restrictions on service where an organization is likely to appear in court and its fundraising limits. It referred to Canon 3(E) for a possible later disqualification if an organization appeared before the judge. Source: Opinion 02-7.

Citations and references

Maine Code of Judicial Conduct:

• Canons 4(C)(3)(a)(i)-(ii), 4(C)(3)(b)(i)-(iii), and 3(E).

See also

• ME Judicial Ethics Op. 03-2: Charity Brochure
• ME Judicial Ethics Op. 05-3: Charity Donations

Source

• Landing page: Maine advisory-opinion index
• Original PDF: Opinion 02-7

Original opinion text

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

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

JUDICIAL ETHICS COMMITTEE

Advisory Opinion 02-7

Issued: 11/19/2002

Issue

May a Judge be a member of the Board of Directors of a nonprofit educational foundation or of a nonprofit home/school, or of a center which 5 the consolidation of a Boys/Girls club and YMCA? |

Statement of Facts

The Judge in question serves on the Board of Directors of the Goodwill-Hinckley Home Association, which operates the Hinckley School. The Judge is also on the Board of Directors of the Foursquare Foundation, a community foundation which accepts donations and grants and

distributes them to institutions to assist young boys and girls. He also serves on the Board of the

Unity Foundation, a family foundation involved in philanthropic entrepreneurship providing education, training and resources to nonprofit organizations. In addition, he serves on the Board of the Alfond Youth Center, a consolidation of the Waterville Boys/Girls Club and YMCA. Discussion

The Judicial Canons, particularly Canon 4, provide that a judge shall conduct his/her extra-judicial activities as to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial obligations. Specifically, Canon 4(C) governmental, civic or charitable activity provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

“(3) A judge may serve as an officer, director, trustee or non-legal advisor,

or be a member of an organization, or where permitted under subsection (2) of

this section a governmental agency, devoted to the improvement of the law, the

legal system or the administration of justice or of an educational, religious,

charitable, fraternal or civic organization not conducted for profit, subject to the

following limitations and the other requirements of this code.

(a) A judge shall not serve as an officer, director, trustee, or non-legal advisor if it is likely that the organization or agency:

(i) will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge, or

(11) will be engaged frequently in adversary proceedings in the court of which the judge is a member or in any court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the court of which the judge is a member.

(b) A judge as an officer, director, trustee or non-legal advisor, or as a member or otherwise:

(i) may assist such an organization in planning fund-raising and may participate in the management and investment of the organization’s funds, but shall not personally participate in the solicitation of funds or other fund-raising activities, except that a judge may solicit funds from other judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority;

(ii) may make recommendations to public and private fund-
granting organizations on projects and programs concerning the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice;

_(iii) shall not use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for fund-raising or membership solicitation. A judge should not be a speaker or the guest of honor at an event of the organization held

primarily for fund-raising, but a judge may attend such events.”

First, it would appear from the facts at hand that all of the positions described above fall within the definition “of an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization not conducted for profit.”

However, the inquiry does not stop at this point. From the information known to the Committee, it does not appear likely that the organizations in question will be engaged in proceedings that will come before the judge or that the organizations will be frequently engaged in litigation before the court of which the judge is a member. Therefore, Canon 4(C)(3) does not bar the judge’s involvement. If an occasion ever presents itself where one or more of the organizations happens to be involved in litigation before the judge, the judge may disqualify

himself pursuant to Canon 3(E).

Conclusion
Accordingly, it is the position of the Committee that from the facts presented, applying the existing Canons of Ethics, the Judge can continue the activities described, subject to the

limitations expressed above.

P:\rputnam \JudicialEthics\opinion02-7.doc