Could a judge moderate a gubernatorial debate and serve as unpaid secretary of a nonprofit nursing home?

Plain-English summary

A judge asked about moderating a debate between candidates for governor and serving as unpaid corporate secretary of a nonprofit nursing home whose board the judge had served on since 1988. The secretary role did not involve day-to-day management.

The Commission found that debate moderation did not violate former Canon 5A. It permitted the secretary role within former Canon 4C(3)’s limits, reminding the judge to review the organization’s activities regularly and noting that the 1988 opinion predated a guardianship statute that expanded some circuit judges’ responsibilities.

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 judge moderate the governor debate?

A: Yes. The Commission found no prohibited political activity in the described moderation.

Q: Could the judge be the nursing home’s secretary?

A: Yes, within Canon 4C(3)’s limits and with regular review of the organization’s activities.

Background and rules framework

Former Canon 5A restricted judicial political activity; Canon 4C(3) set limits on civic and charitable organization roles.

Citations and references

West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former):

• Canon 5A, political activity.
• Canon 4C(3) and commentary, civic and charitable organization service.

See also

• WV JIC Advisory Opinion 1996-14: Senior housing advisory board

Source

• Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
• Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 1995-29, 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
212 Dickinson Street
Post Office Box 1629
Charleston, West Virginia 25326-1629
(304) 558-0169 FAX (304) 558-0831

November 3, 1995

Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 1995-29

Dear
The Judicial Investigation Commission received your request for an advisory opinion dated September 1, 1995. In that corresponden ce you asked two questions: First, you stated that you have been requested to serve as a moderator for a debate to be held sometime this winter between the candidates for governor. You asked whether this would constitute an ethics violation. Second, you stated that you have served on the board of directors of a nonprofit nursing home since 1988. You stated that a previous opinion authorized your continued service on that board. You now inquire about whether or not you could serve as a secretary to the corporate structure. You indicated that this is a nonpaying position which has nothing to do with the day-to-day management of the corporation. These inquiries were reviewed by the Commission at its recent meeting.
Canon 5 of the Code of Judicial Conduct treats areas of political activity which are permitted and not permitted by a judge or judicial candidate. You indicate in your first question that you have been asked to serve as a moderator for a debate to be held between the candidates for governor. In that position as moderator you would not be engaging in any activities which are prohibited by Canon 5 specifically Canon 5A. The Commission feels that you could serve as a moderator for the debate.
Your service as a secretary to the corporate structure of the nonprofit nursing home would be permitted within the limits set forth in Canon 4C(3) of the Code of Judicial

• 2 - November 3, 1995

conduct. You should review the commentary to that Canon which suggests that a judge regularly re-examine the activities of a civic or charitable organization to determine if it is proper to continue his or her relationshi~ with it. Also you should be aware that the prior opinion which was issued in 1988 predated the passage of the guardianship statute which places new responsibilities on a circuit judie in some instances. With the limitations of the canon in mind and the obligation to re-examine regularly the activities of the organization, the Commission feels that you could serve in the capacity which you state in question two of your inquiry. · It is hoped that this opinion fully addresses. those issues which you raised in fOUr correspondence. If you have any further question rega ding t i s matter, do not hesitate to contact the commission ly yours,

Chairman
FLF,II/bl