Could a magistrate work for a supermarket or buy stock in the company?

Plain-English summary

A magistrate sought outside employment at a supermarket and also asked about becoming a shareholder. Court administrative counsel had already denied the employment request.

The Commission applied former Canon 4D(3) and said the magistrate could not be a supermarket employee because it was not a closely held family business or family investment entity. The answer did not separately resolve passive stock ownership. The official index and PDF filename identify this item as 2003-04, while its printed header says “2003-5.”

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2003, 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 work at the supermarket?

A: No. The Commission applied the former ban on a judge being an employee of a business entity.

Q: Did the letter decide whether the magistrate could own shares?

A: No. It recited the question but answered the proposed employment.

Background and rules framework

Former Canon 4D(3) barred a judge from serving as a business employee, subject to exceptions for closely held family businesses and family investment entities.

Citations and references

West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former):

• Canon 4D(3), business employment and family-business exceptions.

See also

• WV JIC Advisory Opinion 2003-02: Magistrate assistant police dispatcher

Source

• Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
• Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 2003-04, 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 INVEST!GATION COMMISSION
Post Office Box 1629
Charleston, West Virginia 25326-1629
(304) 558-0169 • FAX (304) 558-0831

March 10, 2003

Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 2003-5

Dear.

Your letter to the Judicial Investigation Commission in which you asked for an advisory opinion has been reviewed by the Commission. In your correspondence you stated that the adviso1y opinion was in regard to your request for outside employment aside from your duties as County Magistrate. You stated that you have received a letter from the General Administrative Counsel denying your request. You had asked whether you could work for an Supermarket owned by a man who had been your previous employer from 1991 through
1996. Apparently this individual also acted as a treasurer for the circuit judge in the 2000 election and treasurer for the prosecuting attorney in the 1996 election. You also asked whether becoming a stockholder in the company owned by this individual violates the Canons still prohibiting you from working at the establishment.

    To address the question which you have raised, the Commission reviewed Canon 4D(3)

of the Code of Judicial Conduct. That section of Canon 4 states as follows:

    Canon 4. A judge shall so conduct the judge's extra-judicial activities as to
    minimize the risk of conflict with judicial obligations.

    D. Financial activities.

    (3) A judge shall not serve as an officer, director, manager, general partner,
    adviser or employee of any business entity except that a judge mayi subject to the
    requirements of this Code, manage and participate in:

March 10, 2003
Page Two

(a) a business closely held by the judge or members of the judge's family; or
(b) a business entity primarily engaged in investment of the financial resources of the judge or members of the judge's family.

Based upon the language contained in this section of Canon 4, it is clear that you may not engage in the proposed activity of being an employee of the Supennarket. The Canon clearly and unequivocally states that a judge may not be an employee of any business entity with the exceptions being a business closely held by the judge or members of the judge's family or a business entity primarily engaged in investment of the financial resources of the judge or the judge's family. Based upon the clear language you could not be an employee of the Supermarket.

If you have any further question regarding this matter do not hesitate to contact the Commission.

Donald H. Cookman, Chairperson
Judicial Investigation Commission

DHC:nb