May a court vendor pay for a judge and court employees to visit its offices for e-filing training?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2018. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
An established court vendor offered to pay travel and other expenses for a circuit judge and two IT employees to visit its offices for training on a statewide e-filing and case management project. The request said the visit would not increase the vendor’s contract payment.
A majority of the Commission permitted the visit because the vendor was already approved and the trip served the court system. It required reasonable expenses, including travel, lodging and meals, and reporting of their total value on the appropriate judicial financial disclosure forms. Judicial duties retained priority over the trip.
In practice
The opinion conditions this vendor-paid visit on reasonable costs, judicial financial reporting and precedence of official duties.
Common questions
Q: Could the vendor pay for the visit?
A: Yes, a Commission majority permitted it on the stated facts.
Q: Must the judge disclose the expenses?
A: Yes. The opinion requires reporting the total value paid by the company on judicial financial disclosure forms.
Background and rules framework
The Commission considered Rules 1.2, 3.1(A)-(C), 3.12 and 3.15(A)(1). It connected outside court-system activities and compensation reporting to the proposed vendor-funded training.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct:
- Rule 1.2, public confidence and appearance of impropriety.
- Rule 3.1(A)-(C) and Comment 1, outside activities concerning the administration of justice.
- Rule 3.12 and Comments 1-2, compensation for outside activities.
- Rule 3.15(A)(1), reporting compensation.
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 2018-07, redacted
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.
JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
City Center East - Suite 1200 A
4 700 MacCorkle Ave., SE
Charlest on, West Virginia 25304
(304) 558-0169 • FAX (304) 558-0831
April 12, 2018
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 2018-07.
Dear
Your recent requests for an advisory opinion concerning the same issue were reviewed by the Judicial Investigation Commission. The factual scenario giving rise to your requests is as follows: The Comt has an existing long-tenn contract with a based company. was hired to assist in creating and implementing unifonn e-filing and case management systems for circuit comts in every county in West Virginia.
The Court and want to move the project forward in an efficient, effective and expeditious manner, not only for the benefit of litigants but also because a subscription fee will be charged after ten counties are fully online and a p01tion collected will be retmned to the Court to offset system expenses. To that end, has offered to pay for the transportation and expenses for a circuit court judge and two IT employees to visit the offices in to gain fmther training on the implementation of the system.
You have indicated that the trip would "facilitate and accommodate the furtherance of our goals of implementing a uniform case management system and e-filing throughout the state" without "result[ing] in any additional funds being paid to apart from those
JIC Advisory Opinion 2018-7
September 12, 2018
Page 2 of3
already set fo1th in the existing contract." You further state that the judge in question and the IT employees are very knowledgeable concerning e-filing.
You want to know whether the judge and the IT employees may visit at the company's expense. You also want to know what the repo1ting requirements, if any, are for the judge.
To address the questions, the Commission has reviewed Rules 1.2, 3 .1 (A) through (C), 3 .12 and 3 .15 of the Code of Judicial Conduct which provide:
Rule 1.2 Confidence in the Judiciary
A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
Ruic 3.1 Extrajudicial Activities in General
A judge may engage in extrajudicial activities, except as prohibited by law or this Code. However, when engaging in extrajudicial activities, a judge shall not:
(A) participate in activities that will interfere with the proper performance of the judge's judicial duties;
(B) paiticipate in activities that will lead to frequent disqualification of the judge;
(C) paiticipate in activities that would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality; . . .
Rule 3.12 - Compensation for Extrajudicial Activities
A judge may accept reasonable compensation for extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code or other law unless such acceptance would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge's independence, integrity or impartiality.
Rule 3.15 - Reporting Requirements
(A) A judge shall publicly report the amount or value of:
JIC Advisory Opinion 2018-7
September 12, 2018
Page 3 of3
(1) Compensation received for extrajudicial activities as permitted by Rule 3.12
Comment [1] to Rule 3.1 notes that judges are "encouraged" and "uniquely qualified" to engage in extrajudicial activities that concern the law, the legal system and the administration of justice...." Comment [1] to Rule 3.12 states:
A judge is permitted to accept honoraria, stipends, fees, wages, salaries, royalties, or other compensation for speaking, teaching, writing, and other extrajudicial activities provided the compensation is reasonable and commensurate with the task performed. The judge should be mindful, however that judicial duties must take precedence over other activities.
Meanwhile, Comment [2] provides that "[c]ompensation derived from extrajudicial activities may be subject to public rep01ting" pursuant to Rule 3.15.
Based upon the foregoing, a majority of the Commission is of the opinion that the judge and the employees may visit at the company expense since the corporation is already the well-established approved vendor for thee-filing project and the purpose of the visit is designed to improve the court system as a whole. However, the expenses, which may include travel, hotel and meals, must be reasonable and the judge has to reports the total value of the costs paid by the company on the appropriate judicial financial disclosure fmms. If the judge named in your request is included in this trip, he must understand that his official duties take precedence over the trip. If there is any fmther question regarding this matter do not hesitate to contact the Commission.
/;;,ff;l_
Ronald E. Wilson, Chairperson
Judicial Investigation Commission
REW/tat
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2018. 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