NYC-BAR February 26, 1996

Can a lawyer publicly criticize a sitting judge after the Commission on Judicial Conduct declines to act on the lawyer's complaint?

Short answer: Yes, within limits. The opinion concluded a lawyer may make public statements critical of a sitting judge's conduct if the criticisms are well-founded, even though the Commission on Judicial Conduct declined to pursue the complaint, provided the statements are intended to improve the legal system and are made in a dignified, temperate manner.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1996. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1996
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A lawyer had complained to the Commission on Judicial Conduct about a sitting judge, and the Commission declined to pursue the complaint. The question was whether the lawyer could nonetheless make public statements criticizing that judge's conduct. The Committee concluded the lawyer could, provided the criticisms were well-founded.

The opinion grounded the limits on such speech in DR 8-102(B), which addresses false accusations against judges, and in the Ethical Considerations directed at improving the legal system and the administration of justice (ECs 8-1, 8-6, and 9-6). The Committee concluded that the Commission's decision not to act on the complaint did not bar the lawyer from voicing well-founded criticism.

The Committee qualified the conclusion: the statements should be intended to improve the legal system, not to serve some other purpose, and should be expressed in a dignified and temperate manner. On that basis the lawyer's proposed public criticism was permissible.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996, before New York replaced the Code of Professional Responsibility (the Disciplinary Rules and Ethical Considerations cited here) with the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, effective April 1, 2009. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer publicly criticize a judge's conduct?

A: The opinion concluded that a lawyer may make public statements critical of a particular sitting judge's conduct as long as the criticisms are well-founded.

Q: Does the Commission on Judicial Conduct's refusal to act stop the lawyer from speaking?

A: No. The Committee concluded that the Commission's declining to pursue the complaint did not preclude the lawyer from making well-founded public criticism.

Q: How should such criticism be expressed?

A: The opinion concluded the statements should be intended to improve the legal system and made in a dignified, temperate manner.

Background and rules framework

The opinion was decided under New York's then-governing Code of Professional Responsibility, principally DR 8-102(B) (which bars knowingly false accusations against a judge), read with ECs 8-1, 8-6, and 9-6 on improving the legal system and the administration of justice. The Model Rules analogue is Rule 8.2 (statements concerning judges and judicial candidates).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • New York Code DR 8-102(B); ECs 8-1, 8-6, 9-6 (Model Rule 8.2 analogue)

See also

Source

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1996 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.