Could a part-time family law master act as counsel in an appeal before West Virginia’s Supreme Court?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1995. 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 new part-time family law master asked about acting as counsel in a case before the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals and working as a contract attorney for the Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges.
The Commission treated the requester as a continuing part-time judge under former Canon 6C. It permitted Supreme Court counsel work if the case did not involve the same subject-matter jurisdiction as the master’s role. On the workers compensation contract question, the letter referred the requester to an earlier December 9, 1994 advisory opinion without restating its conclusion.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1995, 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 master represent a party before the Supreme Court?
A: Yes, if the case fell outside the subject-matter jurisdiction of the part-time family law master.
Q: Did this letter decide the workers compensation contract question?
A: It referred to an earlier December 9, 1994 opinion and did not repeat that opinion’s answer.
Background and rules framework
Former Canon 6C(2) allowed a continuing part-time judge to practice law subject to limits on the same case, related proceedings, and the same subject-matter jurisdiction.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former):
- Canon 6C(1)-(2), continuing part-time judges and legal practice.
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 1995-11, 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.
I,
JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
212 Dickinson Street
Post Office Box 1629
Charleston, West Virginia 25326-1629
(304) 558-0169 FAX (304) 558-0831
June 14, 1995
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 1995-11
Dear
Your letter to Counsel dated April 18, 1995, was reviewed by the Judicial Investigation Commission as its recent meeting. In that correspondence you indicate that you have been appointed to the position of part-time family law master for the County region. You asked if in light of your appointment you would be precluded from acting as counsel in a case before the Supreme Court of Appeals. You also asked in light of your appointment whether you would be precluded from acting as a contract attorney for the West Virginia Workers' Compensation Office of Judges.
A part-time family law master falls within the definition of a continuing part-time judge as defined in the terminology section of the Code of Judicial Conduct as "a judge who serves repeatedly on a part-time basis by election or under a continuing appointment, a part-time family law master, a 'juvenile referee, and a mental hygiene commissioner." ·The perimeters of activities permitted continuing part-time judges are set forth in Canon 6C(l) and (2) of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Canon 6C(2) states that a continuing part-time judge "may practice law in the court on which the judge serves or in any court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the court on which the judge serves, but shall not act as a lawyer in a proceeding in which the judge has served as a judge or in any other proceeding related thereto, or in any matter involving
- 2 - June 14, 1995
the same subject-matter jurisdiction." Based on this language you would be permitted to act as counsel in a case before the su~reme court of Appeals of West Virginia if that case did not involve the same subject matter jurisdiction as that of a part-time family 1-aw master.
The second question which you raise has been addressed in an advisory opinion issued by the Judicial Investi~ation · Commission on December 9, 1994. A copy of that opinion has been forwarded to you previously.
If you have any further questions regarding the matters which you have raised, do not hesitate to contact the Commission. yours,
,~I, Chairman
FLF,II/bl
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1995. 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