Opinion 22-84

May 5, 2022

Digest:      A judge must object in writing to use of their name on a flyer announcing a not-for-profit civic organization’s fund-raiser and advise the organization to remove or omit the judge’s name from any further fund-raising announcements or invitations. Once the judge has done so, the judge may attend the event and, on these facts, be recognized as one of multiple inductees during the induction ceremony. The judge may make charitable contributions to the organization, including by purchasing a table for friends and family to attend the event.

Rules:     22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.2(C); 100.4(C)(3)(b)(i)-(ii), (iv); Opinions 18-146; 15-171; 15-60; 14-132; 14-45; 12-52; 07-80; 04-140; 03-92; 02-78; 99-99; 98-40.

Opinion:

         A full-time judge asks if they may attend and be honored at an upcoming “Hall of Fame” induction program for a particular sport. The event is a fund-raiser, and all proceeds will benefit a not-for-profit civic organization which owns and operates a facility dedicated to the sport. The judge would be honored as a founding member of the not-for-profit organization, and is only one of many such “player, coach, contributor or founder” inductees listed on the flyer advertising the event.¹ The judge’s name is not given special prominence on the flyer and there is no indication of the judge’s judicial status. The judge further asks if it is ethically permissible to purchase a table for ten friends and family members to attend.

         A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must always promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]). A judge must not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[C]) and thus may not personally solicit funds (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][i]) or permit the use of judicial prestige for fund-raising (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][iv]). A judge may attend fund-raising events for not-for-profit educational, religious, charitable, cultural, fraternal or civic organizations, but “may not be a speaker or the guest of honor” at such events unless an exception applies (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][ii]).²

1. Attendance as Inductee

         Where, as here, a judge learns that a not-for-profit organization has improperly used the judge’s name on the invitation to a fund-raiser, or in other fund-raising materials, the judge must object in writing (see e.g. Opinions 18-146 [judge’s name used to solicit journal ads]; 07-80 [judge’s name used in fund-raising invitation]; 03-92 [judge’s photograph appeared in charity’s fund-raising brochure]).

         Ordinarily, even after registering objections in writing, the judge must decline the previously advertised award or honor, but may attend the event (see e.g. Opinions 15-60; 14-45; 99-99).  

         Here, although the judge’s role as inductee is neither unadvertised nor ancillary to the induction ceremony program, we note that the judge is not “the” guest of honor or inductee, but instead is merely one member of a sizeable group being recognized for their volunteer efforts in various capacities over a period of years. We thus look to Opinion 02-78 for guidance.

         In Opinion 02-78, the inquiring judge was a past president of a not-for-profit community organization that operates a community center. The organization decided to honor its past presidents at an annual fund-raising dinner and included the judge with other past presidents in the list of honorees. The judge objected, both orally and in writing, to the inclusion of the judge’s name in the list of honorees and explained the judicial ethics prohibition. We advised, under those circumstances, that the judge could attend the fund-raising event; could purchase a journal advertisement; and could acknowledge his/her status as a member of the collective group of past presidents being honored (see Opinion 02-78).

         We conclude this judge must object in writing to use of their name on the flyer and advise the organization to remove or omit the judge’s name from any further announcements or invitations. Once the judge has done so, the judge may attend the event and be recognized as one of the founder inductees.

2. Purchasing a Table

         Purchasing a table for multiple attendees at this not-for-profit civic organization’s fund-raising event is essentially a charitable contribution.³ As we have recognized, while “judges may not personally solicit funds, they may make charitable contributions to any permissible charity or not-for-profit organization” (Opinion 12-52 [citations omitted]). Thus, a judge may make a monetary contribution from personal funds to a wide variety of charitable and civic causes, including to a private school’s athletic program (see id.); a non-profit legal services organization (see Opinion 04-140); or a Police Benevolent Association (see Opinion 98-40). Moreover, in our view, the organization’s misuse of the judge’s name in a flyer advertising its fund-raiser does not preclude the judge from making charitable contributions to the organization (cf. Opinion 02-78 [judge may purchase an advertisement in the organization’s fund-raising journal]).

         Accordingly, we conclude the judge may make charitable contributions to the organization, including by purchasing a table for friends and family to attend the event.⁴

 _______________________________

¹ We understand the organization wished to honor the founders’ involvement several years ago, before the inquirer became a judge, but the event was repeatedly postponed. This much-delayed event now honors inductees who have played various roles over the organization’s first few years of operations.

² The exceptions set forth in Section 100.4(C)(3)(b)(ii) permit a judge to accept “an unadvertised award ancillary to” such events, or to be “a speaker or guest of honor at a court employee organization, bar association or law school function.” Neither textual exception applies here.

³ The commercial sponsors of the event are presumably underwriting the costs of the dinner, but the same analysis applies whenever the price includes a fund-raising premium.

⁴ Of course, when a judge makes charitable donations, the judge must do so “without personally soliciting funds” (see Opinion 14-132). Thus, a judge must not solicit funds from non-family members to cover the cost of a table, where that amount includes a fund-raising premium (see Opinion 15-171 [permitting a judge to solicit funds for charity from family members, but not from friends]).