Can a lawyer organize, buy tickets for, attend, or contribute to a testimonial dinner for a sitting judge?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1970. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Opinion E-70-1 answered an inquiry from a lawyer who asked whether it would be ethical to respond to a solicitation seeking funds for a testimonial dinner for a sitting judge, other than on the judge's retirement. The inquiring lawyer described such dinners as a practice in which many lawyers felt they had to contribute to stay in the judge's good graces. The committee concluded that it is unethical for an attorney to organize, alone or with others, a testimonial dinner for a judge during the judge's term of office, and equally unethical to purchase tickets for, attend, or contribute to such a testimonial unless it is organized by a bar association.
The committee grounded its analysis in the then-new Code of Professional Responsibility. DR 7-110(A) provided that "[a] lawyer shall not give or lend anything of value to a judge," a rule rooted in former Canon 3's concern that marked attention and unusual hospitality toward a judge subject both judge and lawyer to misconstruction of motive. Canon 9 directed that a lawyer should avoid even the appearance of professional impropriety. The committee observed that a testimonial organized by an ad hoc committee with widespread ticket solicitation gives rise to the possibility that the organizers are seeking to curry favor with the judge, especially where there is no special occasion such as retirement, and that the solicited lawyer is on the horns of a dilemma because a refusal may be held against the lawyer while a contribution is a prohibited "gift" to the judge.
The committee drew on outside authority, including Opinion 440 of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York (testimonials should be sponsored by an established bar association, and soliciting non-friends to subscribe is improper) and ABA Informal Opinion 900 (a self-appointed group of lawyers should not solicit funds for a judge's portrait). The committee concluded that if a bar association arranges a testimonial, any gift or presentation should preferably be made without listing the names and amounts of individual contributors. Because the question was one of first impression in Wisconsin, the opinion was made prospective only.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1970, before Wisconsin's July 1, 2007 adoption of the revised Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys (the state's Ethics 2000 update), and it applies the former Code of Professional Responsibility, including DR 7-110(A) and Canon 9. The current counterpart governing gifts and contributions touching judges is SCR 20:3.5 / Model Rule 3.5 (impartiality and decorum of the tribunal), supplemented by the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct (SCR Chapter 60). 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: Who may organize a testimonial dinner for a judge?
A: Under this opinion, only a recognized bar association. The committee held that individual lawyers may not organize such a testimonial, alone or with others.
Q: Why is contributing to a testimonial for a sitting judge a problem?
A: The committee reasoned that a contribution is a "gift" to the judge prohibited by DR 7-110(A), and that the solicitation gives rise to the appearance that lawyers are currying favor with the judge, contrary to Canon 9.
Q: Did the opinion forbid all recognition of judges?
A: No. The committee allowed a testimonial sponsored by a bar association, adding that any gift or presentation should preferably be made without listing individual contributors' names and amounts.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied the former Code of Professional Responsibility, principally DR 7-110(A) (a lawyer shall not give or lend anything of value to a judge) and Canon 9 (avoiding the appearance of impropriety), informed by ABA and New York City Bar opinions. The current counterpart is SCR 20:3.5 / Model Rule 3.5 (impartiality of the tribunal), with judicial conduct governed by the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Model Rule 3.5 / SCR 20:3.5 (impartiality of the tribunal; gifts to judges); former Code DR 7-110(A), Canon 9, former Canon 3
Other opinions cited:
- Association of the Bar of the City of New York Opinion 440: bar-association sponsorship of judicial testimonials
- ABA Informal Opinion 900: solicitation of funds for a judge's portrait
See also
- WI Ethics Op. E-71-1: Testimonial Dinners for Judges and Judicial Candidates
- WI Ethics Op. E-72-1: Local Bar Judicial Endorsement Programs
Source
- Landing page: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/pages/formal-opinions.aspx
- Original PDF: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/E-70-1.pdf
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1970 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.