Opinion 24-138

September 12, 2024

Digest:  A full-time judge may serve on the board of directors for a local not-for-profit senior center, subject to generally applicable limitations.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.4(A)(1)-(3); 100.4(C)(3)(a)(i)-(ii); 100.4(C)(3)(b)(i)-(ii), (iv); Opinions 24-102; 24-48; 22-187; 21-34.

Opinion:

          A non-judge who is seeking full-time judicial office asks whether it will be ethically permissible to remain on the board of directors of a local not-for-profit senior center on assuming the bench.  The inquirer states the senior center “does not engage in litigation” and its “only purpose is to provide services to adults over the age of 60.”  These services include cultural, educational, and recreational programs; transportation; health and safety presentations and screenings; day trips and social opportunities; meals; and general benefits check-up and support.

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]).  A judge’s extra-judicial activities must be compatible with judicial office and must not cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s impartiality, detract from the dignity of judicial office, or interfere with judicial duties (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[A][1]-[3]).  A judge generally may serve as an officer or director of an educational, religious, charitable, cultural, fraternal or civic organization not conducted for profit, provided that the entity is not likely to “be engaged in proceedings that ordinarily would come before the judge” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][a][i]) and, if the judge is full-time, is also not likely to “be engaged regularly in adversary proceedings in any court” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][a][ii]). 

          We have previously advised that a full-time judge may serve on the board of a not-for-profit charitable organization so long as: such service does not conflict with the judge’s judicial duties; the judge will not have the opportunity to make referrals to the organization; the organization will not be regularly engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge or in adversarial proceedings in any court; and the judge will not be involved in soliciting or fund-raising for the organization (see Opinions 24-102; 24-48; 22-187).  As described, the work of the senior center would not conflict with the inquirer’s duties and the inquirer’s court does not make referrals to the organization.  Nor is there any indication the senior center is likely to be engaged in litigation of any kind, in any court (cf. Opinion 21-34 [full-time judge may not serve on the board of a not-for-profit senior housing development that is, as a landlord, likely to engage regularly in eviction proceedings or other adversarial litigation]). 

          We therefore conclude it is ethically permissible for the inquirer to remain on the board of directors of the not-for-profit senior center after being sworn in as a full-time judge, subject to generally applicable limitations on judicial speech and conduct, including the prohibitions on fund-raising and membership solicitation (see e.g. 22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][i]-[ii], [iv]).

          Should the senior center appear before the inquirer as a party, witness, or advocate, disqualification is appropriate but may be subject to remittal (see Opinion 24-102).