May a judge perform licensed school-bus inspections for two school districts on weekends?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2014. 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 judge licensed to inspect school buses was asked to perform inspections for two school districts. The work would take about five or six weekend days, and the districts and their officials had no past or current cases before the judge’s court. [Source: Opinion 14-03, p. 1]
Applying Rule 21-301, the committee perceived no conflict on those facts. It found the limited weekend schedule did not interfere with judicial duties and said the judge’s prior performance of this work before taking the bench did not appear coercive. [Source: Opinion 14-03, pp. 1–2]
If a district or official later appeared before the court, the judge would need to consider disqualification under Rule 21-211. The judge also could not use court premises, staff, or resources for the inspection work. [Source: Opinion 14-03, p. 2]
In practice
The permission addresses the described short weekend assignment and the absence of school district cases before the judge. The opinion identifies possible later disqualification and bars use of court resources for the work. [Source: Opinion 14-03, pp. 1–2]
Common questions
Q: Did the committee find a current conflict in the inspections?
A: No. It found none on the facts supplied, including the limited weekend schedule and absence of cases involving the districts or officials. [Source: Opinion 14-03, pp. 1–2]
Q: What if a school district later appears before the judge?
A: The judge would need to consider whether Rule 21-211 requires disqualification. [Source: Opinion 14-03, p. 2]
Q: May court staff or premises be used for the inspections?
A: No. The committee expressly barred use of court premises, staff, or other court resources for that work. [Source: Opinion 14-03, p. 2]
Background and rules framework
The committee applied New Mexico Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 21-301(A)–(E) to outside activity and cited Rule 21-211 for possible disqualification if a related case arises. [Source: Opinion 14-03, pp. 1–2]
Citations and references
New Mexico Code of Judicial Conduct:
- Rules 21-301, 21-211. Source: Opinion 14-03.
See also
Source
- Landing page: New Mexico judicial advisory opinions
- Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 14-03
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.
RECEIVED
APR 21 2014
SUPREME COURT
LAW LIBRARY
|
i
i
i
|
|
!
|
Advisory Committee on the Code of Judicial Conduct
Hon. JaJames J. Wechsler, Chair -
Paul L. Biderman, Esq.
Prof. Robert L. Schwartz
Hon. Freddie J. Romero
Hon. Sandra W. Engel
| | i= April 7, 2014
| Re: Judicial Advisory Opinion No. 14-03
i
Dear [redacted]
|
; You have informed the Advisory Committee on the Code of Judicial Conduct that you are licensed by the State of New Mexico to perform inspections of school buses and have performed that work for several years. You have been asked to perform inspections for two school districts. You would be able to perform the work in approximately five or six days on weekends. You have asked
the Committee whether the Code of Judicial Conduct permits you to do this work.
Rule 21-301 NMRA of the Code of Judicial Conduct permits a judge to engage in extrajudicial activities except if:
A. the activities “will interfere with the proper performance of the judge’s judicial duties”;
B. the activities “will lead to frequent disqualification of the judge”:
C. participation in the activities “would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge’s independence, integrity, or impartiality”;
D. the judge would be engaging “in conduct that would appear to a reasonable person to be coercive”; or
E. the judge would “make use of court premises, staff, stationery, equipment, or other resources... .”
The Committee does not perceive a conflict from the information that you have provided. As to paragraph A, you will perform the work on weekends for a limited period of time. As to paragraphs B and C, you have further advised the Committee that the school districts and their officials have not previously had and do not currently have cases before your court. The Committee
|
points out that, if such a case should arise, you would need to consider whether you would need to disqualify yourself. See Rule 21-211 NMRA (requiring a judge to disqualify himself or herself if the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned). As to paragraph D, it does not appear that you have engaged in any coercive activity because you have been continuously performing this work for the school districts in the past before you became a judge. As to paragraph E, you may not, of course, utilize court premises, staff, or resources in connection with this work.
Very truly yours,
James J. Wechsler
Chair
cc: Paul L. Biderman, Esq.
Hon. Sandra W. Engel
Hon. Freddie J. Romero
Professor Robert L. Schwartz
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2014. 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