Opinion 21-98
June 17, 2021
Please Note:
See AO-347 concerning the status of Section 100.4(H)(2).
Digest: On these facts, a full-time judge need not report the described financial
transactions under Section 100.4(H)(2). The judge should consult the
Unified Court System’s Ethics Commission concerning whether and how
to report them under Part 40. Rules: 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.3(F); 100.4(D)(2); 100.4(H)(1);
100.4(H)(2); 100.4(I); Opinion 14-67. Opinion: A full-time judge asks whether two streams of rental income resulting from
extra-judicial activity must be reported to the chief clerk of the judge’s court as
“compensation” under Section 100.4(H)(2). First, the judge and another relative are
the sole members of a limited liability company (LLC), which holds a parcel of real
estate. The LLC rents this real estate to a closely held family business (in which the
judge does not participate). The LLC’s rental income must be reported on tax
returns, but the income merely “covers the expenses of the LLC (real estate taxes,
insurance, etc.).” Thus, as a member of the LLC, the judge is allocated a portion of
the LLC’s rental income and must report this amount on their taxes, but the judge
“never actually receive[s] any money or other direct compensation from the LLC.”
Second, the judge and a sibling-executor are the sole beneficiaries of their parent’s
estate, which had a rental property as its principal asset. The judge collected rental
income on behalf of the estate and used this income, along with personal funds, to
pay a portion of the monthly expenses to maintain the property. However, neither
the rental income nor the eventual sale of the property (at a loss) was sufficient to
cover the estate’s expenses, and thus there are insufficient funds even to reimburse
the judge for the judge’s expenditure of personal funds. The judge understands the
estate will report the rental income on its tax returns. A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR
100.2) and must always act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity
and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]). A full-time judge may receive
compensation for permissible extra-judicial activities if its source does not give the
appearance of influencing the judge’s performance of judicial duties or otherwise
give the appearance of impropriety, subject to certain limitations (see 22 NYCRR
100.4[H][1]). Section 100.4(H)(2) provides: Public Reports. A full-time judge shall report the date, place and nature
of any activity for which the judge received compensation in excess of
$150, and the name of the payor and the amount of compensation so
received… The judge’s report shall be made at least annually and shall be
filed as a public document in the office of the clerk of the court on which
the judge serves or the office designated by law. As the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct do not define “compensation” (except
in reference to expense reimbursement), we note that commonly used synonyms for
“compensation” include payment, reimbursement, earnings, fee, remuneration,
salary, wages, stipend, honorarium, revenue, profits and income. Here, both
financial transactions result from permissible extra-judicial activities.1 Accordingly,
we now assess whether they fall within the reporting requirement of the rule. On the facts described, we understand the judge has not received any direct or
indirect personal income from either activity. While the judge must report an
allocated share of the rental income from the LLC on the judge’s taxes, the judge
does not, in fact, receive any portion of this income as it is used to pay the LLC’s
expenses. Likewise, with respect to the estate’s rental income, the judge has not
received any compensation, reimbursement or share of this income, but instead used
it to pay the estate’s expenses. In our view, the judge is not required to report either financial transaction
under Section 100.4(H)(2), as it does not appear the judge has received compensation
exceeding the $150 threshold. We note there could potentially be reporting obligations under Part 40, which
we cannot address.2 The Unified Court System’s Ethics Commission (tel. 1-212-428-2899) is the agency with the authority to interpret Part 40. To the extent the judge
has not already done so, the judge should contact the Ethics Commission for advice
and direction regarding the mechanics of reporting the income, or lack thereof, of
the assets described in this inquiry on the judge’s Annual Statement of Disclosure (see
Opinion 14-67). ___________________________ 1 A full-time judge may “hold and manage investments of the judge and members of the
judge's family, including real estate” (22 NYCRR 100.4[D][2]). 2 The Rules recognize that a judge’s “income, debts, investments or other assets” may need
to be disclosed in three circumstances: where mandated by Section 100.4(H)(2); where
needed for remittal of disqualification under Section 100.3(F); or “as required by Part 40 of
the Rules of the Chief Judge” (22 NYCRR 100.4[I]).