Did a judge have to recuse or disclose when a lawyer who prepared the judge’s will belonged to a firm with cases pending before the judge?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1990. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
An attorney prepared wills for a judge and the judge’s spouse while the attorney’s firm had cases pending in the judge’s court. The attorney did not handle litigation or participate in those cases.
The Commission found no need for recusal or disclosure on those facts because the representation was a single completed matter, not an ongoing one. The letter cited no numbered Canon.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1990 under the earlier Judicial Code of Ethics, before West Virginia adopted its 1993 Code and its 2015 Code of Judicial Conduct, effective December 1, 2015. Subsequent rule changes or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Code before relying on the letter's conclusion.
Common questions
Q: Did the judge need to recuse from the firm’s cases?
A: No, on the stated one-time representation facts.
Q: Was disclosure required?
A: No. The Commission said disclosure was unnecessary in this instance.
Background and rules framework
The Commission distinguished a one-time personal legal service from an ongoing lawyer-client relationship, without citing a numbered Canon.
Citations and references
The opinion cites no numbered West Virginia Judicial Code of Ethics provision.
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 1990-05, redacted
- Code adoption date: West Virginia JIC 2015 Annual Report
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.
JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
Room EM400, State Capitol
Charleston 25305
September 5, 1990
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 1990-05
Dear
At a recent meeting of the Judicial Investiga tion Commissio n, your request for an advisory opinion was reviewed involving the situation of an attorney preparing wills for you and Mrs. when you had cases pending in your court involving the firm with which the attorney is associate d. You emphasize d, however, that the attorney is not involved in the cases and does no litigation himself. You question your recusing yourself now and in the future from cases involving the attorney' s firm and whether it was your duty to disclose the fact that he had done a will for you and Mrs.
After discussio n of the possible ramificati ons involving your questions , it was determine d that this body did not feel it was necessary for you to recuse yourself nor make a disclosur e in this instance since this was a one-time represent ation and did not involve an ongoing matter.
If you have questions concernin g this opinion, please feel free to bring them to my attention .
Very t
•
. J Stevens, Chairman
CRG/bl
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1990. 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