If a magistrate runs for judge and uses the title 'magistrate' in campaign materials, what must the materials say?

Currency note

The Board withdrew this opinion on October 6, 2006, after the Supreme Court of Ohio suspended the operation and enforcement of Canon 7(D)(2) effective January 28, 2006; it is retained here for research only and is not current guidance. The opinion was issued in 2004 under the former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, since superseded by the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct effective March 1, 2009. Treat this page as historical context. Verify against the current Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Plain-English summary

The Board addressed how a magistrate who is running for judge may use the term or title "magistrate" in campaign materials. It concluded that when the magistrate uses that title, the materials must identify the court and the division of the court on which the magistrate serves.

The Board described how the requirement applies across media. On a campaign sign or billboard, wording of similar import to "Magistrate X of Y Court Z Division for Judge" is appropriate. In other campaign material, as long as the magistrate clearly indicates the court and division served, it is not necessary to repeat the name of the court and division with every use of the term or title "magistrate."

Common questions

Q: Can a magistrate running for judge call themselves "magistrate" in ads?

A: Yes, with identification. The opinion concluded the magistrate may use the title if the materials identify the court and division served. The Board later withdrew the opinion in 2006.

Q: Does every use of "magistrate" have to repeat the full court and division?

A: No. Per the opinion, signs and billboards should carry wording like "Magistrate X of Y Court Z Division for Judge," but other materials need not repeat the court and division with every use if they clearly indicate it.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets the former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 7, which governed judicial-campaign conduct, including the now-suspended Canon 7(D)(2) on campaign communications. The Supreme Court of Ohio suspended the operation and enforcement of Canon 7(D)(2) effective January 28, 2006, and the Board withdrew this opinion later that year.

Citations and references

Rules of Judicial Conduct:

• Former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 7(D)(2) (suspended eff. Jan. 28, 2006)

See also

• Ohio BPC Op. 2003-008: Magistrate Judicial Candidate: Robe Photographs, Use of Title, and Campaign Funds at Political Events
• Ohio BPC Op. 1992-016: Referee Using Title in Judicial Campaign Advertising
• Ohio BPC Op. 2002-013: Magistrate Campaign Activities on Behalf of the Appointing Judge

Source

• Landing page: https://ohioadvop.org/advisory-opinion-index/
• Original PDF: https://www.ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Op-04-004.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

The Supreme Court of Ohio
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE
41 SOUTH HIGH STREET-SUITE 2320, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-6104
(614) 644-5800 (888) 664-8345 FAX: (614) 644-5804
www.sconet.state.oh.us

                                       OFFICE OF SECRETARY


                                     OPINION 2004-4
                                    Issued June 3, 2004

[Withdrawn-by Board on Oct. 6, 2006 due to Supreme Court of Ohio suspending the operation and
enforcement of Canon 7(D)(2), eff. Jan. 28, 2006]

SYLLABUS: A magistrate who is running for election as judge and using the term or
title “magistrate” in judicial campaign materials must identify the court and the division
of the court on which he or she serves. On each campaign sign or billboard words of
similar import to “Magistrate X of Y Court Z Division for Judge” are appropriate. In
other campaign material, so long as the magistrate clearly indicates the court and division
on which the magistrate serves it is not necessary to repeat the name of the court and
division with every use of the term or title “magistrate.”

OPINION: This opinion addresses a magistrate’s use of the term or title “magistrate” in
his or her judicial campaign advertising.

   Is it proper for a magistrate who is a judicial candidate to identify himself
   or herself as a “magistrate” in campaign materials without identifying the
   court on which he or she serves?

This Opinion looks anew at the issue of a magistrate’s use of the term or title
“magistrate” in judicial campaign materials. Two previous opinions of the Board,
Opinion 96-8 and Opinion 92-16, addressed the use of the title referee or magistrate in
judicial campaign material. The Board withdrew Opinion 96-8 in Opinion 2003-8
because of a change in the Board’s advice regarding magistrates wearing robes in judicial
campaign advertising. Opinion 92-16 is marked “Not Current” due to subsequent
amendments to Canon 7. New guidance on the issue is due.

Pertinent provisions of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct are set forth.

   Canon 7(B)(2) A judge or judicial candidate shall not do any of the
   following:

           (f) Knowingly misrepresent his or her identity, qualifications,
           present position, or other fact or the identity, qualifications, present
           position, or other fact of an opponent.

   Canon 7(D) Campaign Standards. During the course of any campaign for
   nomination or election to judicial office, a judicial candidate, by means of
   campaign materials, including sample ballots, an advertisement on radio
   or television or in a newspaper or periodical, a public speech, press

Op. 2004-4

   release, or otherwise, shall not knowingly or with reckless disregard do
   any of the following:

       1. Use the title of an office not currently held by a judicial candidate
          in a manner that implies that the judicial candidate does currently
          hold that office;

       2. Use the term “judge” when a judge is a candidate for another
          judicial office and does not indicate the court on which the judge
          currently serves;

A magistrate, who is a judicial candidate and who uses “magistrate” as a term or title in
campaign material, must identify the court served. Identification of the court on which a
magistrate serves is necessary in campaign material to comply with Canon 7(B)(2)(f)
(prohibiting knowingly misrepresenting present position) and Canon 7(D)(1) (prohibiting
using the title of an office not held in a manner that implies that the candidate holds that
office). Use of the term or title magistrate in campaign material without identifying the
court on which the magistrate serves misleads the public as to the magistrate’s
qualifications and present position. Without identification of the court, the public may
assume right or wrong that the judicial candidate serves as magistrate in the court to
which he or she seeks election.

Canon 7(D)(2) supports the Board’s application of Canon 7(B)(2)(f) and Canon 7(D)(1).
Canon 7(D)(2) expressly requires that a judge who is a judicial candidate not use the term
“judge” when seeking another judicial office without indicating the court on which the
judge currently serves. It is the Board’s view that the Canon 7(D)(2) standard for use of
the term “judge” should apply equally to a magistrate’s use of the term “magistrate.”

A magistrate’s judicial campaign material should clearly identify the court and the
division of the court on which he or she serves, but a reasonable reading and application
of the rules prevails. On each campaign sign or billboard words of similar import to
“Magistrate X of Y Court Z Division for Judge” are required. In other campaign
material, so long as the magistrate clearly indicates the court and division on which the
magistrate serves it is not necessary to repeat the name of the court and division with
every use of the term or title “magistrate.” When once stated clearly, it serves no purpose
to state repetitiously “Magistrate X of the Y Court Division Z” with each use of the term
or title “magistrate” in campaign material.

Use of the term or title “court magistrate” as opposed to the term or title “magistrate” is
redundant. Thus, its use, particularly as a title, is not encouraged. However, if used, the
above advice applies.

Thus, the Board advises as follows. A magistrate who is running for election as judge
and using the term or title “magistrate” in judicial campaign materials must identify the
court and the division of the court on which he or she serves. On each campaign sign or
billboard words of similar import to “Magistrate X of Y Court Z Division for Judge” are

Op. 2004-4

appropriate. In other campaign material, so long as the magistrate clearly indicates the
court and division on which the magistrate serves it is not necessary to repeat the name of
the court and division with every use of the term or title “magistrate.”

Advisory Opinions of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline are
informal, nonbinding opinions in response to prospective or hypothetical questions
regarding the application of the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the
Bar of Ohio, the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Judiciary, the
Code of Professional Responsibility, the Code of Judicial Conduct, and the
Attorney’s Oath of Office.