Opinion 24-119

September 12, 2024

Digest: Whether a support magistrate may conduct an inquiry into an attorney’s declared conflict of interest presents a legal question beyond the jurisdiction of this Committee.

Rules:   Judiciary Law § 212(2)(l); 22 NYCRR 100.6(A); 101.1; Opinions 23-71; 22-21; 21-49; People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307 (1975).

Opinion:

          An attorney before the inquiring support magistrate has asserted a conflict of interest and has requested a change of schedule so that an unconflicted colleague may take over the representation.  The attorney’s written description of the conflict does not provide extensive details.  The support magistrate is concerned about the potential impact on their court calendar if matters are re-assigned for potentially “weak” conflicts, and thus asks to what extent the support magistrate may “challenge an attorney’s assertion of their own conflict of interest, if at all.”

          A support magistrate is a quasi-judicial official and “must comply with the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct in the performance of their judicial functions and must otherwise so far as practical and appropriate use such rules as guides to their conduct” (Opinion 23-71 [internal quotation marks omitted]). 

          The necessity or proper scope of a judicial inquiry into a possible conflict of interest, and the proper balance between the potentially competing considerations of the right to effective representation of counsel and the right to retain an attorney of one’s choice, present legal questions beyond our jurisdiction (see People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307 [1975]; 22 NYCRR 101.1; Judiciary Law § 212[2][l]; Opinions 22-21; 21-49).

We must therefore decline to answer the inquiring judge’s question.