CANON 3
A JUDGE SHALL CONDUCT
THE JUDGE’S EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF CONFLICT WITH THE
OBLIGATIONS OF JUDICIAL OFFICE.
RULE 3.1
Extrajudicial
Activities in General
A judge may engage in
extrajudicial activities, except as prohibited by law* or this Code. However,
when engaging in extrajudicial activities, a judge shall not:
(A) participate in
activities that will interfere with the proper performance of the judge’s
judicial duties;
(B) participate in
activities that will lead to unreasonably frequent disqualification of the
judge;
(C) participate in
activities that would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge’s
independence,* integrity,* or impartiality;*
or
(D) make inappropriate
use of court premises, staff, stationery, equipment, or other resources.
COMMENT
[1] To the extent
that time permits, and judicial independence and impartiality are not
compromised, judges are encouraged to engage in appropriate extrajudicial
activities. Judges are uniquely qualified to engage in extrajudicial activities
that concern the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice, such
as by speaking, writing, teaching, or participating in scholarly research
projects. In addition, judges are permitted and encouraged to engage in
educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic extrajudicial activities
not conducted for profit, even when the activities do not involve the law. See
Rules 3.7 and 3.12.
[2] Participation in
both law-related and other extrajudicial activities helps integrate judges into
their communities, and furthers public understanding of and respect for courts
and the judicial system.
[3] Discriminatory
actions and expressions of bias or prejudice by a judge, even outside the
judge’s official or judicial actions, are likely to appear to a reasonable
person to call into question the judge’s integrity and impartiality. Examples
include jokes or other remarks that demean individuals based upon their race,
sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual
orientation, or socioeconomic status. For the same reason, a judge’s
extrajudicial activities must not be conducted in connection or affiliation
with an organization that practices invidious discrimination. See Rule 3.6.
RULE 3.2
Appearances before
Governmental Bodies and Consultation with Government Officials
A judge shall not
appear voluntarily at a public hearing before, or otherwise consult with, an
executive or a legislative body or official, except:
(A) in connection
with matters concerning the law,* the legal system, or the administration of
justice;
(B) in connection
with matters about which the judge acquired knowledge or expertise in the
course of the judge’s judicial duties; or
(C) when the judge is
acting pro se in a matter involving the judge’s legal or economic interests,*
or when the judge is acting in a fiduciary* capacity.
COMMENT
[1] Judges possess
special expertise in matters of law, the legal system, and the administration
of justice, and may properly share that expertise with governmental bodies and
executive or legislative branch officials.
[2] In appearing
before governmental bodies or consulting with government officials, judges must
be mindful that they remain subject to other provisions of this Code, such as
Rule 1.3, prohibiting judges from using the prestige of office to advance their
own or others’ interests, Rule 2.10, governing public comment on pending and
impending matters, and Rule 3.1(C), prohibiting judges from engaging in
extrajudicial activities that would appear to a reasonable person to undermine
the judge’s independence, integrity, or impartiality.
[3] In general, it
would be an unnecessary and unfair burden to prohibit judges from appearing
before governmental bodies or consulting with government officials on matters
that are likely to affect them as private citizens, such as zoning proposals
affecting their real property. In engaging in such activities, however, judges
must not refer to their judicial positions, and must otherwise exercise caution
to avoid using the prestige of judicial office.
RULE 3.3
Testifying as a
Character Witness
A judge shall not
testify as a character witness in a judicial, administrative, or other adjudicatory
proceeding or otherwise vouch for the character of a person in a legal
proceeding, except when duly subpoenaed.
COMMENT
[1] A judge who,
without being subpoenaed, testifies as a character witness abuses the prestige
of judicial office to advance the interests of another. See Rule 1.3. Except in
unusual circumstances where the demands of justice require, a judge should
discourage a party from requiring the judge to testify as a character witness.
RULE 3.4
Appointments to
Governmental Positions
A judge shall not
accept appointment to a governmental committee, board, commission, or other
governmental position, unless it is one that concerns the law,* the legal
system, or the administration of justice.
COMMENT
[1] Rule 3.4
implicitly acknowledges the value of judges accepting appointments to entities
that concern the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. Even
in such instances, however, a judge should assess the appropriateness of
accepting an appointment, paying particular attention to the subject matter of
the appointment and the availability and allocation of judicial resources,
including the judge's time commitments, and giving due regard to the
requirements of the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.
[2] A judge may represent
his or her country, state, or locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection
with historical, educational, or cultural activities. Such representation does
not constitute acceptance of a government position.
RULE 3.5
Use of Nonpublic
Information*
A judge shall not
intentionally disclose or use nonpublic information acquired in a judicial
capacity for any purpose unrelated to the judge’s judicial duties.
COMMENT
[1] In the course of
performing judicial duties, a judge may acquire information of commercial or
other value that is unavailable to the public. The judge must not reveal or use
such information for personal gain or for any purpose unrelated to his or her
judicial duties.
[2] This Rule is not
intended, however, to affect a judge’s ability to act on information as
necessary to protect the health or safety of the judge or a member of a judge’s
family, if consistent with other provisions of this Code.
RULE 3.6
Affiliation with
Discriminatory Organizations
(A) A judge shall not
hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on
the basis of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual
orientation. A judge’s membership in a religious organization as a lawful
exercise of the freedom of religion is not a violation of this Rule.
(B) A judge shall not
use the benefits or facilities of an organization if the judge knows* or should
know that the organization practices invidious discrimination on one or more of
the bases identified in paragraph (A). A judge’s attendance at an event in a
facility of an organization that the judge is not permitted to join under
paragraph (A) is not a violation of this Rule when the judge’s attendance is an
isolated event that could not reasonably be perceived as an endorsement of the
organization’s practices.
COMMENT
[1] A judge’s public
manifestation of approval of invidious discrimination on any basis gives rise
to the appearance of impropriety and diminishes public confidence in the
integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. A judge’s membership in an
organization that practices invidious discrimination creates the perception
that the judge’s impartiality is impaired.
[2] An organization
is generally said to discriminate invidiously if it arbitrarily excludes from membership
on the basis of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or
sexual orientation, persons who would otherwise be eligible for admission.
Whether an organization practices invidious discrimination is a complex
question to which judges should be attentive. The answer cannot be determined
from a mere examination of an organization’s current membership rolls, but
rather, depends upon how the organization selects members, as well as other
relevant factors, such as whether the organization is dedicated to the
preservation of religious, ethnic, or cultural values of legitimate common
interest to its members, or whether it is an intimate, purely private
organization whose membership limitations could not constitutionally be
prohibited, such as scouting organizations.
[3] When a judge
learns that an organization to which the judge belongs engages in invidious
discrimination, the judge must resign immediately from the organization.
[4] This Rule does
not apply to national or state military service.
RULE 3.7
Participation in
Educational, Religious, Charitable, Fraternal, or Civic Organizations and
Activities
(A) Subject to the
requirements of Rule 3.1, a judge may participate in activities sponsored by
organizations or governmental entities concerned with the law,* the legal
system, or the administration of justice, and those sponsored by or on behalf
of educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations not
conducted for profit, including but not limited to the following activities:
(1) assisting such an
organization or entity in planning related to fund-raising, and participating
in the management and investment of the organization’s or entity’s funds;
(2) soliciting
contributions* for such an organization or entity, but only from members of the
judge’s family,* or from judges over whom the judge does not exercise
supervisory or appellate authority;
(3) soliciting
membership for such an organization or entity, even though the membership dues
or fees generated may be used to support the objectives of the organization or
entity, but only if the organization or entity is concerned with the law, the
legal system, or the administration of justice;
(4) appearing or
speaking at, receiving an award or other recognition at, being featured on the
program of, and permitting his or her title to be used in connection with an
event of such an organization or entity, but if the event serves a fund-raising
purpose, the judge may participate only if the event concerns the law, the
legal system, or the administration of justice;
(5) making
recommendations to such a public or private fund-granting organization or
entity in connection with its programs and activities, but only if the
organization or entity is concerned with the law, the legal system, or the
administration of justice; and
(6) serving as an
officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of
such an organization or entity, unless it is likely that the organization or
entity:
(a) will be engaged
in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge; or
(b) will frequently
be engaged in adversary proceedings in the court of which the judge is a member
or in any court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the court of which the
judge is a member.
(B) A judge may
encourage lawyers to provide pro bono publico legal
services.
COMMENT
[1] The activities
permitted by paragraph (A) generally include those sponsored by or undertaken
on behalf of public or private not-for-profit educational institutions and
other not-for-profit organizations, including law-related, charitable, and
other organizations.
[2] Even for
law-related organizations, a judge should consider whether the membership and
purposes of the organization or the nature of the judge’s participation in or
association with the organization would conflict with the judge’s obligation to
refrain from activities that reflect adversely upon a judge’s independence,
integrity, and impartiality.
[3] Mere attendance
at an event, whether or not the event serves a fund-raising purpose, does not constitute
a violation of paragraph (A)(4). It is also generally permissible for a judge
to serve as an usher or a food server or preparer or to perform similar
functions at fund-raising events sponsored by educational, religious,
charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations. Such activities are not
solicitation and do not present an element of coercion or abuse the prestige of
judicial office.
[4] Identification of
a judge’s position in educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic
organizations on letterhead used for fund-raising or membership solicitation
does not violate this Rule. The letterhead may list the judge’s title or
judicial office if comparable designations are used for other persons.
[5] In addition to
appointing lawyers to serve as counsel for indigent parties in individual
cases, a judge may promote broader access to justice by encouraging lawyers to
participate in pro bono publico legal services, if in
doing so the judge does not employ coercion or abuse the prestige of judicial
office. Such encouragement may take many forms, including providing lists of
available programs, training lawyers to do pro bono publico
legal work, and participating in events recognizing lawyers who have done pro
bono publico work.
RULE 3.8
Appointments to
Fiduciary* Positions
(A) A judge shall not
accept appointment to serve in a fiduciary position, except as a fiduciary for
the estate, trust, or person of a member of the judge’s family,* and then only if
such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties.
(B) A judge shall not
serve in a fiduciary position if the judge as fiduciary will likely be engaged
in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge, or if the estate,
trust, or ward becomes involved in adversary proceedings in the court on which
the judge serves, or one under its appellate jurisdiction.
(C) A judge acting in
a fiduciary capacity shall be subject to the same restrictions on engaging in
financial activities that apply to a judge personally.
(D) If a person who
is serving in a fiduciary position becomes a judge, he or she shall comply with
this Rule as soon as reasonably practicable, but in no event later than one
year after becoming a judge.
COMMENT
[1] A judge should
recognize that other restrictions imposed by this Code may conflict with a
judge’s obligations as a fiduciary. In such circumstances, a judge should
resign as fiduciary. For example, serving as a fiduciary might require frequent
disqualification of a judge under Rule 2.11 because a judge is deemed to have
an economic interest in shares of stock held by a trust if the amount of stock
held is more than de minimis.
RULE 3.9
Service as Arbitrator
or Mediator
A judge shall not act
as an arbitrator or a mediator or perform other judicial functions apart from
the judge’s official duties unless expressly authorized by law.*
COMMENT
[1] This Rule does
not prohibit a judge from participating in arbitration, mediation, or
settlement conferences performed as part of assigned judicial duties. Rendering
dispute resolution services apart from those duties, whether or not for
economic gain, is prohibited unless it is expressly authorized by law.
RULE 3.10
Practice of Law
A judge shall not
practice law. A judge may act pro se and may, without compensation, give legal
advice to and draft or review documents for a member of the judge’s family,*
but is otherwise prohibited from serving as the family member’s lawyer in any
forum.
COMMENT
[1] A judge may act
pro se in all legal matters, including matters involving litigation and matters
involving appearances before or other dealings with governmental bodies. A
judge must not use the prestige of office to advance the judge’s personal or
family interests. See Rule 1.3.
RULE 3.11
Financial, Business,
or Remunerative Activities
(A) A judge may hold
and manage investments of the judge and members of the judge’s family.*
(B) A judge shall not
serve as an officer, director, manager, general partner, advisor, or employee of
any business entity except that a judge may manage or participate in:
(1) a business
closely held by the judge or members of the judge’s family; or
(2) a business entity
primarily engaged in investment of the financial resources of the judge or
members of the judge’s family.
(C) A judge shall not
engage in financial activities permitted under paragraphs (A) and (B) if they
will:
(1) interfere with
the proper performance of judicial duties;
(2) lead to frequent
disqualification of the judge;
(3) involve the judge
in frequent transactions or continuing business relationships with lawyers or
other persons likely to come before the court on which the judge serves; or
(4) result in
violation of other provisions of this Code.
COMMENT
[1] Judges are
generally permitted to engage in financial activities, including managing real
estate and other investments for themselves or for members of their families.
Participation in these activities, like participation in other extrajudicial
activities, is subject to the requirements of this Code. For example, it would
be improper for a judge to spend so much time on business activities that it
interferes with the performance of judicial duties. See Rule 2.1. Similarly, it
would be improper for a judge to use his or her official title or appear in
judicial robes in business advertising, or to conduct his or her business or
financial affairs in such a way that disqualification is frequently required.
See Rules 1.3 and 2.11.
[2] As soon as
practicable without serious financial detriment, the judge must divest himself
or herself of investments and other financial interests that might require
frequent disqualification or otherwise violate this Rule.
RULE 3.12
Compensation for
Extrajudicial Activities
(A) A judge may accept
reasonable compensation for extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code or
other law* unless such acceptance would appear to a reasonable person to
undermine the judge’s independence,* integrity,* or impartiality.*
(B) A judge shall not
receive compensation for performing a marriage ceremony during regular court
hours. A judge may receive compensation for performing a marriage ceremony
during non-court hours.
COMMENT
[1] A judge is
permitted to accept honoraria, stipends, fees, wages, salaries, royalties, or
other compensation for speaking, teaching, writing, and other extrajudicial
activities, provided the compensation is reasonable and commensurate with the
task performed. The judge should be mindful, however, that judicial duties must
take precedence over other activities. See Rules 2.1 and 3.1.
RULE 3.13
Acceptance of Gifts,
Loans, Bequests, Benefits, or Other Things of Value
(A) A judge shall not
accept any gifts, loans, bequests, benefits, or other things of value, if
acceptance is prohibited by law* or would appear to a reasonable person to
undermine the judge’s independence,* integrity,* or impartiality.*
(B) Unless otherwise
prohibited by law, or by paragraph (A), a judge may accept the following:
(1) items with little
intrinsic value, such as plaques, certificates, trophies, and greeting cards;
(2) gifts, loans,
bequests, benefits, or other things of value from friends, relatives, or other
persons, including lawyers, whose appearance or interest in a proceeding
pending* or impending* before the judge would in any event require
disqualification of the judge under Rule 2.11;
(3) ordinary social
hospitality;
(4) commercial or
financial opportunities and benefits, including special pricing and discounts,
and loans from lending institutions in their regular course of business, if the
same opportunities and benefits or loans are made available on the same terms
to similarly situated persons who are not judges;
(5) rewards and
prizes given to competitors or participants in random drawings, contests, or
other events that are open to persons who are not judges;
(6) scholarships,
fellowships, and similar benefits or awards, if they are available to similarly
situated persons who are not judges, based upon the same terms and criteria;
(7) books, magazines,
journals, audiovisual materials, and other resource materials supplied by
publishers on a complimentary basis for official use;
(8) gifts, awards, or
benefits associated with the business, profession, or other separate activity
of a spouse, a domestic partner,* or other family member of a judge residing in
the judge’s household,* but that incidentally benefit the judge; or
(9) invitations to
the judge and the judge’s spouse, domestic partner, or guest to attend without
charge:
(a) an event
associated with a bar-related function or other activity relating to the law,
the legal system, or the administration of justice; or
(b) an event
associated with any of the judge’s educational, religious, charitable,
fraternal or civic activities permitted by this Code, if the same invitation is
offered to nonjudges who are engaged in similar ways
in the activity as is the judge.
COMMENT
[1] Whenever a judge
accepts a gift or other thing of value without paying fair market value, there
is a risk that the benefit might be viewed as intended to influence the judge’s
decision in a case. Rule 3.13 imposes restrictions upon the acceptance of such
benefits, according to the magnitude of the risk. Paragraph (B) identifies
circumstances in which the risk that the acceptance would appear to undermine
the judge’s independence, integrity, or impartiality is low. In lieu of
imposing financial reporting requirements, Utah has adopted stricter
prohibitions than those proposed by the Model Code against the acceptance of
gifts, loans, bequests, benefits, or other things of value.
[2] Gift-giving
between friends and relatives is a common occurrence, and ordinarily does not
create an appearance of impropriety or cause reasonable persons to believe that
the judge’s independence, integrity, or impartiality has been compromised. In
addition, when the appearance of friends or relatives in a case would require
the judge’s disqualification under Rule 2.11, there would be no opportunity for
a gift to influence the judge’s decision making. Paragraph (B)(2) places no
restrictions upon the ability of a judge to accept gifts or other things of
value from friends or relatives under these circumstances.
[3] Businesses and
financial institutions frequently make available special pricing, discounts,
and other benefits, either in connection with a temporary promotion or for
preferred customers, based upon longevity of the relationship, volume of
business transacted, and other factors. A judge may freely accept such benefits
if they are available to the general public, or if the judge qualifies for the
special price or discount according to the same criteria as are applied to
persons who are not judges. As an example, loans provided at generally
prevailing interest rates are not gifts, but a judge could not accept a loan
from a financial institution at below-market interest rates unless the same
rate was being made available to the general public for a certain period of
time or only to borrowers with specified qualifications that the judge also
possesses.
[4] Rule 3.13 applies
only to acceptance of gifts or other things of value by a judge. Nonetheless,
if a gift or other benefit is given to the judge’s spouse, domestic partner, or
member of the judge’s family residing in the judge’s household, it may be
viewed as an attempt to evade Rule 3.13 and influence the judge indirectly.
Where the gift or benefit is being made primarily to such other persons, and
the judge is merely an incidental beneficiary, this concern is reduced. A judge
should, however, remind family and household members of the restrictions
imposed upon judges, and urge them to take these restrictions into account when
making decisions about accepting such gifts or benefits.
[5] Rule 3.13 does
not apply to contributions to a judge’s campaign for judicial office. Such
contributions are governed by other Rules of this Code.
RULE 3.14
Reimbursement of
Expenses and Waivers of Fees or Charges
(A) Unless otherwise
prohibited by Rules 3.1 and 3.13(A) or other law,* a judge may accept
reimbursement of necessary and reasonable expenses for travel, food, lodging,
or other incidental expenses, or a waiver or partial waiver of fees or charges
for registration, tuition, and similar items, from sources other than the
judge’s employing entity, if the expenses or charges are associated with the
judge’s participation in extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code.
(B) Reimbursement of
expenses for necessary travel, food, lodging, or other incidental expenses
shall be limited to the actual costs reasonably incurred by the judge and, when
appropriate to the occasion, by the judge’s spouse, domestic partner,* or
guest.
COMMENT
[1] Educational,
civic, religious, fraternal, and charitable organizations often sponsor
meetings, seminars, symposia, dinners, awards ceremonies, and similar events.
Judges are encouraged to attend educational programs, as both teachers and
participants, in law-related and academic disciplines, in furtherance of their
duty to remain competent in the law. Participation in a variety of other
extrajudicial activity is also permitted and encouraged by this Code.
[2] Not infrequently,
sponsoring organizations invite certain judges to attend seminars or other
events on a fee-waived or partial-fee-waived basis, and sometimes include
reimbursement for necessary travel, food, lodging, or other incidental
expenses. A judge’s decision whether to accept reimbursement of expenses or a
waiver or partial waiver of fees or charges in connection with these or other
extrajudicial activities must be based upon an assessment of all the
circumstances. The judge must undertake a reasonable inquiry to obtain the
information necessary to make an informed judgment about whether acceptance
would be consistent with the requirements of this Code.
[3] A judge must
assure himself or herself that acceptance of reimbursement or fee waivers would
not appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge’s independence,
integrity, or impartiality. The factors that a judge should consider when
deciding whether to accept reimbursement or a fee waiver for attendance at a
particular activity include:
(a) whether the
sponsor is an accredited educational institution or bar association rather than
a trade association or a for-profit entity;
(b) whether the
funding comes largely from numerous contributors rather than from a single
entity and is earmarked for programs with specific content;
(c) whether the
content is related or unrelated to the subject matter of litigation pending or
impending before the judge, or to matters that are likely to come before the
judge;
(d) whether the
activity is primarily educational rather than recreational, and whether the
costs of the event are reasonable and comparable to those associated with
similar events sponsored by the judiciary, bar associations, or similar groups;
(e) whether
information concerning the activity and its funding sources is available upon
inquiry;
(f) whether the
sponsor or source of funding is generally associated with particular parties or
interests currently appearing or likely to appear in the judge’s court, thus
possibly requiring disqualification of the judge under Rule 2.11;
(g) whether differing
viewpoints are presented; and
(h) whether a broad
range of judicial and nonjudicial participants are
invited, whether a large number of participants are invited, and whether the
program is designed specifically for judges.