Could a Maine judge work as a cashier at a nonprofit fundraiser after the 2005 Code amendment?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2009. 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 probate judge asked whether Opinion 97-3 still barred a judge from serving as a cashier at a library book sale or working at a charitable food stand. The earlier opinion had treated those activities as violations under the then-existing Code. Source: Opinion 09-4.
The committee pointed to a Maine Code of Judicial Conduct amendment effective July 1, 2005. Canon 4(C)(3)(b) permitted working at a fundraising event when the judge’s participation could not reasonably be perceived as directly soliciting funds. Applying that changed standard, the committee said it would approve the activities posed in Opinion 97-3. Source: Opinion 09-4.
The committee concluded that Opinion 97-3 had no continuing validity because the governing standard had changed. Source: Opinion 09-4.
In practice
For the cashier and food-stand activities described, Opinion 09-4 applied the 2005 amendment and approved the work under its stated condition: the judge’s participation could not reasonably appear to directly solicit funds. Source: Opinion 09-4.
Common questions
Q: Did Opinion 09-4 keep the earlier prohibition in Opinion 97-3?
A: No. The committee said Opinion 97-3 had no continuing validity after the 2005 Code amendment. Source: Opinion 09-4.
Q: What fundraising work did the opinion address?
A: It addressed a judge acting as cashier at a nonprofit library book sale or working at a charity food stand. Source: Opinion 09-4.
Q: What limit did the amended Canon impose?
A: A judge could work at a fundraising event so long as participation could not reasonably be perceived as directly soliciting funds. Source: Opinion 09-4.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied the July 1, 2005 amendment to Maine Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 4(C)(3)(b). The quoted provision distinguished permitted work at a fundraising event from personal solicitation of funds. Source: Opinion 09-4.
Citations and references
Maine Code of Judicial Conduct:
- Canon 4(C)(3)(b).
Other opinions cited:
- Maine Judicial Ethics Committee Advisory Opinion 97-3, whose prior fundraiser ruling the committee said no longer applied.
See also
Source
- Landing page: Maine advisory-opinion index
- Original PDF: Opinion 09-4
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
JUDICIAL ETHICS COMMITTEE
Advisory Opinion 09-4
Issued November 25, 2009
Issue
A Probate Judge has inquired as to the present applicability of Advisory Opinion 97-3,
issued October 14, 1997. The issue in Opinion 97-3 was whether a judge may act as a cashier at
a used book sale held to benefit a non-profit library or at a food stand operated by a charitable
organization.
Statement of Facts
The Ethics Committee applying the then existing Code of Judicial Conduct responded
that the suggested activity was a violation of the then existing Code.
Applicable Provisions
The Supreme Judicial Court in Docket No. SJC-112-A amended the Maine Code of
Judicial Conduct, effective July 1, 2005. The pertinent provisions of the Amendment are as
follows:
Canon 4(C)(3)(b):
(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: (a) solicit funds from other judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority; (b) be listed as an officer, director, or trustee of such an organization on its fund-raising letters, but may not sign that letter or be listed as a judge or as honorable; and (c) work at a fund-raising event so long as the judge’s participation could not reasonably be perceived by others as directly soliciting funds.
Discussion
As we understand the Amendment effective July 1, 2005, it was intended in part at least
to allow judicial officers to work at fund-raising events so long as the judge’s participation could
not reasonably be perceived by others as directly soliciting funds.
Thus, if the issues presented in Opinion No. 97-3 were presented today; namely, whether
a judge may act as a cashier at a used book sale held to benefit a non-profit library or at a food
stand operated by a charitable organization, the Judicial Ethics Committee would apply the new
standard and approve the activity.
Conclusion
In view of the 2005 Amendment to the Code, and thus a change in the legal standard to
be applied, Advisory Opinion 97-3 has no continuing validity.
1770043_1.DOC
2
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2009. 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