State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Question

Is it proper for a judicial officer to hear matters presented by a lawyer, if the lawyer has formed a campaign committee for the judicial officer's candidacy for another judicial position?

Is it proper for the judicial officer to hear matters presented by other members of the lawyer's firm?

May the judicial officer hear matters of other lawyers who lend public support for the judicial officer's candidacy?

Answer

A judicial officer may hear matters presented by a lawyer who has formed a campaign committee for the judicial officer's candidacy for another judicial position if there is disclosure of the campaign relationship and the lawyers and parties, independently of the judge's participation, all agree in writing or on the record that the campaign relationship is immaterial. (CJC Canon 3(C) and (D).)

A judicial officer may hear matters presented by other member's of the lawyer's firm. If the members of the lawyer's firm are similarly active and visible in the judge's election campaign, then there must be full disclosure of the campaign relationship and agreement to the judicial officer's participation as described above.

The question of whether a judicial officer may hear matters presented by other lawyers who lend public support of the judicial officer's candidacy will turn on the nature of that support. If other lawyers are merely contributing funds to the campaign as outlined in CJC Canon 7(B)(2), then there would be no need for any disclosure. However, if the support is made known to the judicial officer and the judicial officer's impartiality might reasonably be questioned by any opposing party or lawyer on the basis of such support, then there must be full disclosure of the support and agreement to the judicial officer's participation as described above.

Comment

This opinion was amended because as originally drafted it addressed attorney conduct which is not covered by the Code of Judicial Conduct. It has been amended to address judicial conduct which is covered by the Code of Judicial Conduct. Additionally, the Committee took this opportunity to redraft language to clarify the opinion.

Opinion 88-07

03/16/1988

Amended 07/15/1993