May a family court use an administrative order to reassign all cases involving a judge's spouse's law partner?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2025. 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's lawyer spouse formed a PLLC with another lawyer who also practiced before the judge. The opinion accepted that the judge could no longer preside over cases involving the new partner under Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11(A)(2)(c). The judge proposed a Chief Family Court Judge's administrative order directing clerks to assign all of the partner's family cases to other family court judges, with new cases transferred when the partner filed a notice of appearance.
The Commission permitted that proposed arrangement for current and future cases. It cited Rule 2.5(B) on cooperation in court administration and said the judge should, as far as possible and consistent with Rule 2.5(A), consider equitable distribution of cases so the other judges are not unfairly overloaded.
In practice
The opinion allows the described reassignment order as a way to handle the requesting judge's disqualification from cases involving the spouse's new law partner. It also addresses the effect of those transfers on the other judges' caseloads.
Common questions
Q: Can the Chief Family Court Judge direct clerks to assign the partner's cases to other judges?
A: Yes. The Commission approved the proposed administrative-order process for current and future cases involving the partner.
Q: When would a new case be transferred under the proposal?
A: The opinion describes transfer when the partner files a notice of appearance.
Q: What concern did the Commission raise about the other judges?
A: It said the requesting judge should consider equitable distribution, to the extent possible, so the other judges are not unfairly overloaded.
Background and rules framework
The opinion quotes West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11(A)(2)(c) on a more than de minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding, held by the judge's spouse or related persons, Rule 2.5(B) on cooperation in court business, and cites Rule 2.5(A) in its caseload direction.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct:
- Rule 2.11(A)(2)(c), disqualification involving a more than de minimis interest.
- Rule 2.5(A) and (B), cited in the Commission's case distribution and court administration discussion.
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 2025-03, redacted
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official redacted PDF for research purposes. The linked PDF is authoritative. JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
WV Judicial Tower - Suite 700 A
4700 MacCorkle Ave., SE
Charleston, West Virginia 25304
(304) 558-0169
January 15, 2025
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 2025-03
Dear
:
Your request for an advisory opinion was recently reviewed by the Commission. You are a long time family court judge who is married to a lawyer. Your spouse recently formed a PLLC with another lawyer and the two began practicing together on January 1, 2025. Your spouse’s new partner also practices family law before you. You correctly point out that with the formation of the new PLLC, you are no longer able to preside over any cases involving the partner pursuant to Rule 2.11(A)(2)(c) of the Code of Judicial Conduct which states:
(A) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances: . . .
(2) The Judge knows that the judge, the judge’s spouse or domestic partner or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them or the spouse or domestic partner of such a person is: . . . (c) a person who has more than a de minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding; . . .
You want to know if there is any problem with the Chief Family Court Judge entering an Administrative Order that requires the Circuit Clerk(s) to assign all of the partner’s family law cases to the other family court judge(s) in the Circuit. For any new case the transfer will take place at the time the partner files a Notice of Appearance. To address your question, the Commission has reviewed Rule 2.5(B) which states that “[a] judge shall cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business.” JIC Advisory Opinion 2025-03 January 15, 2025 Page 2 of 2
Based upon the foregoing the Commission is of the opinion that you may handle your disqualification of all current and future cases involving the partner in the manner set forth above. To the extent possible and consistent with Rule 2.5(A), you should consider the equitable distribution of cases so as not to unfairly overload the other judge(s). The Commission hopes that this opinion fully addresses the issues which you have raised. Please do not hesitate to contact the Commission should you have any questions, comments or concerns.
Sincerely,
Alan D. Moats, Chairperson
Judicial Investigation Commission
ADM/tat
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2025. 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