Did a foundation's use of a shared address and phone number bar the described judicial involvement?

Short answer West Virginia JIC Opinion 1999-23 found no Code of Judicial Conduct canon prohibiting the described foundation activity, including its use of the stated address and telephone number.
Bar
JUDICIAL-WV
Issued
December 28, 1999

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1999. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

The requester asked about involvement in a foundation established to make charitable contributions and provide public awareness advertising. The letter said the requester would not personally appear in those advertisements. The foundation used the address and telephone number of a redacted entity to reduce operating costs.

After reviewing the Code of Judicial Conduct, the Commission found no canon prohibiting the activity as described. The letter identified no numbered canon and gave no broader ruling about other foundation arrangements.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1999, 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: Did the Commission find a canon barring the described foundation activity?

A: No. It said it could not find any canon that prohibited the activity described in the request.

Q: Did the opinion identify a specific numbered canon?

A: No. It referred to its review of the Code of Judicial Conduct without identifying a numbered canon.

Background and rules framework

The Commission considered the foundation's charitable and public awareness purposes, the requester's lack of personal appearance in the advertising, and the shared address and telephone number described in the request. It gave a conclusion under the Code without citing a particular canon.

See also

Source

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
Post Office Box 1629
Charleston, West Virginia 25326-1629
(304) 558-0169 • FAX (304) 558-0831

December 28, 1999
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 1999-23

Dear :

Your recent letter to Counsel asking for an advisory opinion was reviewed by the Judicial Investigation Commission at its meeting. In your letter you asked for an advisory opinion regarding your involvement and/or participation in the Foundation. You stated that the Foundation was established in 1998 and its purpose is to make charitable contributions and to provide a public awareness service. Currently there are two officers in the Foundation and you are removed an the principal in the Foundation. The sole purpose of the Foundation is to make charitable contributions on behalf of and you as well as provide public awareness advertisements. You stated that you have not, and have no intention of personally appearing in any public information advertisements. You also enclosed a sample of the Foundation stationary for the Commission's review. The address and telephone number are that of the . By using this address and telephone number the Foundation reduces its operating costs. You asked whether or not the Foundation's address and telephone number creates any problems for you under any judicial canon.

The Commission, after a review of the Code of Judicial Conduct, could not find any Canon that would prohibit the activity which you describe in your letter to the Commission. It is hoped this opinion fully addresses those issues which you have raised. If there is any further question regarding this matter do not hesitate to contact the Commission.

Very truly yours,

John W. Bennett, Chairman

JWB:nb

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1999. 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