May a Wyoming municipal judge sign a resignation agreement with a confidentiality clause?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2014. 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 municipal judge serving at the mayor's pleasure was asked to resign and received a proposed resignation agreement and general release. It covered the resignation date, financial matters, and a confidentiality clause applicable to both parties. The clause allowed disclosures to advisors as needed and those required by law or court order; it also anticipated a reviewed resignation letter or press release for public communications.
The committee considered the confidentiality term as part of the larger agreement ending the employment relationship. It described the mutual term as a reasonable part of resolving that relationship and concluded that signing the proposed agreement would not violate Canon 1.
In practice
The opinion addresses the specific agreement presented by a municipal judge and mayor. Its conclusion rests on the clause's mutual application and its place within a broader termination agreement.
Common questions
Q: Does Canon 1 bar the judge from signing the proposed agreement?
A: No. The committee concludes that execution of the proposed agreement would not violate Canon 1.
Q: Did the confidentiality obligation bind only the judge?
A: No. The proposed clause applied to both parties and included exceptions for advisors and disclosures required by law or court order.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applies Canon 1 of the Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct to a municipal judge's proposed resignation agreement. It describes the judge as serving at the mayor's pleasure and the agreement as addressing multiple aspects of the employment relationship.
Citations and references
Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct:
- Canon 1, the provision the committee applied to the proposed agreement.
See also
No sibling opinions yet indexed.
Source
- Landing page: Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee opinions
- Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 2014-01
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2014. 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