State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Opinion 92-11

Question

Would it be appropriate for a judicial officer to appoint the judicial officer's attorney/child to serve as a pro tem judge as a substitute for that judicial officer on an occasional basis?

Answer

CJC Canon 2 provides that judges should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all their activities. CJC Canon 3(B)(4) provides that judges should exercise their power of appointment only on the basis of merit, avoiding nepotism and favoritism. It is not appropriate for a judicial officer to appoint his or her attorney/child to serve as a pro tem judge because an appointment under these circumstances creates an appearance of impropriety and would be viewed as an act of nepotism.

NOTE: Effective June 23, 1995, the Supreme Court amended the Code of Judicial Conduct. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

Opinion 92-11—CJC Canon 3(B)(4) became 3(B)(3).

The Supreme Court adopted a new Code of Judicial Conduct effective January 1, 2011. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

CJC 2.13(A)(2)

Opinion 92-11

08/25/1992

 

Privacy and Disclaimer Notices Sitemap

© Copyright 2025. Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts.

S5