Could a Utah courthouse display photographs of current county bar members but exclude other practicing lawyers?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2020. 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 presiding judge asked about hanging yearbook-style photographs of local county bar members in a courthouse. Membership was voluntary, and practicing lawyers outside the association could not join the display.
The Committee said the selective display could make litigants question the court's impartiality or imply that displayed lawyers had special influence. It applied Rules 1.2, 1.3 and 2.4(C) and rejected the proposed display even though it would feature many lawyers rather than one.
The Committee added that a courthouse could display historical photographs of lawyers no longer practicing if no currently existing law firm was referenced.
Common questions
Q: Did showing many lawyers solve the concern?
A: No. The Committee said the display still excluded nonmember lawyers practicing in the courthouse.
Q: What impression could the display convey?
A: It could suggest court favoritism or special influence for lawyers whose pictures appeared.
Q: Did the opinion allow any lawyer photo display?
A: It allowed a historical display of retired lawyers without references to current firms.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applies Utah Code of Judicial Conduct Rules 1.2, 1.3 and 2.4(C) to the appearance of courthouse favoritism, and discusses earlier Informal Opinion 99-2 on a lawyer award plaque.
Citations and references
- Utah Code of Judicial Conduct Rules 1.2, 1.3 and 2.4(C).
- Utah Judicial Ethics Informal Opinion 99-2.
See also
Source
- Landing page: Utah Courts judicial ethics opinions
- Original PDF: Informal Opinion 20-01
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
Informal Opinion 20-1
June 4, 2020
Question:
A presiding judge has asked the committee whether a display of pictures of members of the local county bar association is permitted in the courthouse.
Answer:
The presiding judge may not allow the pictures to be displayed in the courthouse.
Discussion:
The presiding judge of a district has asked whether a display of pictures of members of the local county bar association is permitted in the courthouse. The pictures are “yearbook-style pictures” placed in a four-foot-by-four-foot frame. According to information received by the committee, members of the local county bar association may opt to have their picture displayed but are not required to do so. The lawyers pay the costs of the photographer and framing. Lawyers who practice in the courthouse but are not members of the county bar association are not allowed to participate in the display.
In Informal Opinion 99-2, the Ethics Advisory Committee addressed whether a court may display a plaque recognizing the trial lawyer of the year. The committee determined that such a plaque could not be displayed. The committee relied on then Canons 1 and 2 in stating that displaying the plaque in the courthouse is problematic because “it may convey the impression that the court is endorsing certain lawyers,” and “the plaque may create the perception of partiality by the judiciary as a whole.” The committee stated that individuals who enter the courthouse and see the plaque may question the court’s ability to remain impartial in cases regarding the lawyer shown on the plaque.
The current opinion request is different from Informal Opinion 99-2 in that the picture frames include many lawyers, with no single lawyer being highlighted. The committee nevertheless determines that the reasoning from Informal Opinion 99-2 applies to this request and the pictures may not be displayed in the courthouse.
Rule 1.2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct requires judges to promote public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary. The rule states that judges must not engage in any conduct that undermines public confidence in the judiciary. Rule 1.3 mandates that judges not abuse the prestige of judicial office or allow others to do so. And rule 2.4(C) prohibits judges from conveying or allowing others to convey the impression that any person or organization is in a position to influence the judge. Each of these rules applies to this request. Displaying the pictures may undermine public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. The display does not include all the lawyers who practice in that courthouse. Membership in a county bar association is voluntary and will not include every lawyer who practices in a particular county. And lawyers who are not members of the bar association but nevertheless practice in the local courthouse are not allowed to participate in the display. A litigant who enters the courthouse and sees a picture of opposing counsel displayed in the courthouse, but does not see a picture of their counsel, may question the court’s ability to be impartial.
The display may also convey the impression that those lawyers whose pictures are displayed are in a special position to influence the court. The committee has no doubt the judges in the courthouse will be impartial, but the code addresses appearances, in addition to actual conduct. See rule 1.2. A courthouse must be free from any suggestion a particular lawyer or lawyers are favored by the court. As the committee stated in Informal Opinion 99-2, “[a] courthouse is a symbol of impartial justice that reflects upon all the judges who work in the building as well as upon the judiciary as a whole.”
The committee therefore determines that pictures of members of the local county bar association may not be displayed in the courthouse. Although not specifically asked in this opinion request, the committee determines that a courthouse could display pictures of members of the bar who are no longer practicing, as long as there is no reference to a law firm that currently exists. The committee recognizes that a historical display of lawyers who have practiced and retired will not convey an impression of partiality or that any particular lawyer is in a special position to influence the courts.
2
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2020. 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