State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Opinion 20-03

Question:

As a recently elected District Court judge, may I preside over cases in which the attorney appearing before me is my former employee, mentee, Rule 9 intern, and campaign manager? As my campaign manager, the attorney did doorbelling, raised funds, and engaged in other duties to support my election. The attorney was recently appointed as the city prosecutor for the largest city that appears in the court in which I preside.

Answer:

Former professional or personal associations with attorneys do not require automatic disqualification. A judge shall hear and decide matter assigned to the judge, except when disqualification or recusal is required. CJC 2.7. However, judges should disqualify themselves in a proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. CJC 2.11. And a judge should disclose on the record information that the judge believes the parties or their lawyers might reasonably consider relevant to a possible motion for disqualification, even if the judge believes there is no basis for disqualification. CJC 2.11 Comment [5].

EAO 88-07 addressed the question of whether a judicial officer may hear matters presented by other lawyers who lend public support to the judge's candidacy. The answer turns on the nature of the support. There is a range of campaign activities that may be included in the description "lending public support". EAO 88-07 distinguished between making a financial donation and actively campaigning for a judge.

In this query, the attorney supported the judge as a campaign manager, which included activities such as doorbelling, raising funds, and other duties to support the judge's election. This campaign support was provided within one year of the attorney becoming the appointed city prosecutor for the city with the largest volume of cases in the District Court in which the judge presides.

While the campaign support alone may not automatically disqualify the judge and may only require disclosure and the offer to recuse under 88-07, lending public support is not the only factor the committee has considered. The attorney's recent campaigning activity for the judge is only one component of the close professional relationship between the judge and the attorney. Here, the attorney also has a close professional relationship with the judge based on the facts that the attorney was the judge's former employee, mentee, and Rule 9 intern for four years before the judge was elected to judicial office.

The fact that the attorney was a recent campaign manager for the judge and had a close mentor/mentee professional relationship with the judge, just prior to the judge taking office, may reasonably give rise to the appearance of impropriety and partiality. CJC 1.2. Therefore, the judge should recuse. CJC 2.11. Recusal should be made for a sufficient period of time to avoid the appearance of impropriety, which can be determined by taking into account the length of the judge's association with the attorney; the nature, frequency, intensity, and duration of the prior association; the amount of time since the association ended, the duration and closeness of personal relationships between the judge and the attorney; and the burden disqualification might place on other judges or the administration of the court. EAO 17-03.

Opinion 20-03

01/27/2020

 

Privacy and Disclaimer NoticesSitemap

© Copyright 2024. Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts.

S5