Could a magistrate employ a sister-in-law as a magistrate assistant under the 1993 Code?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1993. 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 magistrate asked whether the Code of Judicial Conduct effective January 1, 1993 would govern employment of the magistrate’s sister-in-law as an assistant.
The Commission quoted former Canon 3C(4)’s requirement to avoid nepotism and favoritism. It read the Code’s family definitions to include a sister-in-law and concluded that employing her would violate the Canon. The redacted PDF does not display an issuance date; the year comes from the official opinion number.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1993, before West Virginia adopted 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: Could the magistrate employ the sister-in-law?
A: No. The Commission said that doing so would violate Canon 3C(4).
Q: What definition mattered?
A: The Code’s definition of a judge’s family, as applied to the sister-in-law.
Background and rules framework
Former Canon 3C(4) required impartial appointments based on merit and instructed judges to avoid nepotism and favoritism.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former):
- Canon 3C(4), appointments and nepotism.
- Code terminology defining nepotism and a judge’s family.
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 1993-02, 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
Building 1, Room E400
1900 Kanawha Boulevard, East
Charleston, WV 25305-0834
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 1993-02
Dear
Your cor:responden ce dated Decembe:r 11, 1992, to Counsel for the Judicial Investi.g.atio n Commisr:::.:Lon in which you request. an advisory opinion has been reviewed by the Commission at its most recent meeting. In that. letter you ask for an advisory op.inion about whether the Code of \JucUcial Conduct { eff e.ctive. January 1, J 993) would. g.overn your emplo:yment of your sister·-in-law as. your magistrate assistant,
Canan. 3C ( 4) of the Code of ,Judicial Conduct add.resses your question-. Canon 3C (4) states~
CANON 3
A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicia.1 Office Impartially and Diligently c. Administrativ e Responsibilil .:ies.
(4) A judge shall. not make unnecessary· appointments+ A judge shall exercise! the· power of:. appointment impartially and. on the basis of merit. A judge sha.11 avoid. nepotism and favoritism. A judge sha.11 not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of. services rendered.~ The Code- of Judicial Conduct also def·ines nepotism within the terminology section of the Code:
·- 2 -
"Nepotismn iH de-fined !:!.S 11 fa.v01:itlsm show!'! in the treatment of a mr:"lmbBr- of - the judgt.": 1 s fami.ly. or pen;on liv.i.ng in the ju.dgE>~'s househola..n 11 Meml,er of -the judgr~'s fam.ily 0 is defined as Ila spouse,- child, grandchild, parent,. grandpa.rent, or other - relative- or perscm with whom the- judge- maJ.ntaJ.ns a. close. fam.ilia.l r·e1a.tionship .. n Based u.pon· the- def.i.nit.icm.1:., provided, a si.st~er.···in-law wou.ld- fall within a member of the judg·e' s family as set forth .in the Code.
Re?lding Canon 3C ( 4) of the Cede of Jud.i.cial. Cond"..lct and reviewing the definition of "nepoti.sm' 1 as set forth in the terminology section of' the Cocle, it is the opinion of the Judicial Jnvest.igation Commiss.ion that Ca.non 3C (4) of the Code of Judicial Con.duct would be violated by you if you employ your sister--in-law as your ma.gistrate assi.sta.nt.
If you have a.ny- fu:rt.her quf~stion regarding this matter,. do not hesitate to contact the Commission.
CRG/bl
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1993. 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