Could a family court judge use a proposed news article describing court activity?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2002. 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 family court judge submitted a proposed news article summarizing the types and timing of cases heard. The Commission applied former Canon 3B(9), which restricted comments about pending or impending proceedings that could affect their outcome or fairness. It allowed use of the proposed information if it remained generic and public and the judge complied with Canon 3B(9) and statutory confidentiality provisions.
In practice
The opinion's permission was expressly conditioned on the material's generic, public character and on the confidentiality rules applicable to the court's information.
Common questions
Q: Did the Commission allow use of the proposed article?
A: Yes, subject to Canon 3B(9), disclosure of generic public information only, and statutory confidentiality.
Q: Did the letter identify a particular confidentiality statute?
A: It referred to statutory confidentiality provisions without naming a specific section.
Background and rules framework
The letter quoted former Canon 3B(9) of the West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct. The quoted rule addressed public and nonpublic comments about pending or impending proceedings and the corresponding restraint on court personnel.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former): Canon 3; Canon 3B(9).
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 2002-20, redacted
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
August 27, 2002
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 2002-20
Dear
In a recent communication to the Judicial Investigation Commission you asked whether a proposed news article would be proper within the context of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The copy of the article which you forwarded to the Commission set forth what amounts to basically an announced report of the activity conducted by the Family Court Judge for and Counties. The article appears to be a generic summation of the kinds of cases heard, the dates in which they were heard, and the kind of conduct engaged in by the parties with the court. They do not identify any individuals specifically, although, one line does mention a custody dispute involving a 5-year-old male child which was heard in on Friday on July 26. The Commission has reviewed and discussed the inquiry which you have made.
To address the opinion which you have sought, the Commission has reviewed the relevant sections of Canon 3 which state in part:
Canon 3. A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently.
B. Adjudicative responsibilities.
August 27, 2002
Page two
(9) Except for statements made in the course of official duties or to explain court procedures, a judge shall not make any public or nonpublic comment about any pending or impending proceeding which might reasonably be expected to affect its outcome or impair its fairness. The judge shall require similar abstention on the part of court personnel subject to the judge's direction and control.
Based upon the information which you have provided, it is the opinion of the Commission that as long as you comply with the relevant provisions of Canon 3B(9) and disclose only information that is generic in nature and public, you may utilize the proposed information which you have provided. You should make sure that none of the confidentiality provisions of the statute are violated in any information which is provided from your court.
It is hoped that this opinion fully addresses the question which you have raised. If you have any further questions regarding this opinion or other matters do not hesitate to contact the Commission.
Very truly yours,
Donald H. Cookman, Chairperson
Judicial Investigation Commission
DHC:nb
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2002. 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