Opinion 24-200
February 6, 2025
Digest: A part-time judge may represent a client in civil rights litigation in federal court against city police officers and municipal officials in another county.
Rules: Judiciary Law §§ 16-17; 471; 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.3(E)(1); 100.6(B)(2)-(4); Opinions 19-114; 18-163; 12-173; 09-110; 07-212; 98-117.
Opinion:
The inquiring town justice also maintains a private law practice in the area of employment, labor and civil rights law. The judge asks if he/she may represent a client in a federal civil rights lawsuit, alleging wrongful arrest, against a city’s police officers and municipal officials. The city is located outside the county where the judge presides.
A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must always act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]). Therefore, a judge must disqualify in any proceeding where the judge’s impartiality “might reasonably be questioned” (22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]). Unlike a full-time judge, a part-time judge may practice law, subject to certain limitations (see 22 NYCRR 100.6[B][2]-[4]; Judiciary Law §§ 16-17; 471). For example, a part-time judge must “not practice law in the court on which the judge serves” (22 NYCRR 100.6[B][2]), may not represent clients in matters that “originated in” the judge’s court (see e.g. Opinion 12-173), and may not appear before another part-time lawyer judge in the same county (see 22 NYCRR 100.6[B][2]).
Part-time lawyer judges are nonetheless permitted “wide latitude in their legal practice as long as they adhere to the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct” (Opinion 18-163 [citation omitted]). Thus, we advised that a village justice may represent his/her village in federal court civil rights litigation, as the judge “would be representing the village in a court with no connections to the village and on an issue with no connections to the justice court” (Opinion 98-117).[1] We also said a town justice may represent a judge who presides in another court in “a legal matter involving the other judge’s municipality,” where the issues involve “the other judge’s court, court clerks, and the municipal council” (Opinion 09-110). Nor is it unprecedented for a part-time judge to represent a client against a police officer in another jurisdiction (cf. Opinion 07-212 [focusing on the judge’s disqualification obligations, rather than the propriety of the representation]).
Here, as the proposed civil rights litigation is against municipal defendants in another county, we anticipate no conflict with judicial responsibilities, no likelihood of frequent disqualification, nor any appearance of impropriety. Accordingly, we conclude this judge may represent a client in a civil rights action in federal court against police officers and municipal officials in another county.
[1] Opinion 98-117 focused on the propriety of the underlying representation. However, if a particular attorney/client relationship “results in excessive disqualifications, the judge must choose” between judicial office and the representation (Opinion 19-114).