May a judge appoint the judge’s secretary’s son-in-law to cases?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2007. 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 judge asked whether a newly licensed lawyer who was the judge’s secretary’s son-in-law could be placed on the court’s appointment list.
The Commission said the judge could appoint the lawyer to cases but had to use a system that made appointments impartially and without favoritism toward any appointee.
In practice
The approval depends on the impartial appointment process; the opinion does not give this lawyer preferential treatment.
Common questions
Q: Could the lawyer be appointed to cases?
A: Yes, if the judge used an impartial system.
Q: What must the appointment system avoid?
A: Favoritism toward any appointee.
Q: Which Canon governed?
A: Former Canon 3B, including subsection (4) on merit and avoidance of nepotism and favoritism.
Background and rules framework
Former Canon 3B(1), (2), and (4) governed administrative duties, court staff, and appointments. Subsection (4) required impartial, merit-based appointments and avoidance of nepotism and favoritism.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former): Canon 3B(1), (2), and (4).
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 2007-31, 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
December 28, 2007
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 2007-31
Dear
In a recent letter to the Judicial Investigation Commission you asked for an advisory opinion. In that correspondence you stated that your secretary’s son-in-law has passed the Bar and is practicing in He has requested to be put on your appointment list. You inquired about any ethical considerations you might have appointing him to cases in your court.
To address the question which your have raised, the Commission has reviewed Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Canon 3 states in relevant part:
Canon 3. A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently.
A. Judicial duties in general. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge’s other activities. The judge’s judicial duties include all the duties of the judge’s office prescribed by law. In the performance of these duties, the following standards apply.
B. Administrative responsibilities. — (1) A judge shall diligently discharge the judge’s administrative responsibilities without bias or prejudice and maintain professional competence in judicial administration, and should cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business.
December 28, 2007
Page Two
(2) A judge shall require staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge’s direction and control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the judge and to refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice in the performance of their official duties.
(4) A judge shall not make unnecessary appointments. A judge shall exercise the power of appointment impartially and on the basis of merit. A judge shall avoid nepotism and favoritism. A judge shall not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.
Based upon the language contained in the relevant sections of Canon 3, the Commission feels that you can appoint your secretary’s son-in-law to cases in your court. You would be required to utilize a system which would allow you to make such appointments impartially and without favoritism shown to any of the of the appointees.
It is hoped that this opinion fully addresses the question which you have raised. If there is any further question regarding this matter do not hesitate to contact the
Commission.
Very truly yours,
[signature]
Judicial Investigation Commission
FLF,I:nb
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2007. 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