Opinion 24-57
March 14, 2024
Digest: A judge may invite attorneys to his/her wedding, provided that the attorneys are not on trial before the judge at the time of the event. The judge may also invite members of law enforcement to the wedding. For two years after the wedding, the judge must disclose when a wedding guest appears in the judge’s court.
Rules: 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A), (B); 100.3(E)(1); 100.4(D)(5)(d); Opinions 23-85; 22-138; 11-125; 11-101; 07-141; 06-44; People v Moreno, 70 NY2d 403 (1987); 2006 Ann Rep of NY Commn on Jud Conduct at 193.
Opinion:
A judge who was previously employed by a not-for-profit legal services provider is marrying an individual who is employed in law enforcement. The judge first asks if it is ethically permissible to invite the judge’s former public sector attorney colleagues, attorneys who were on the assigned counsel panel, and the future spouse’s law enforcement colleagues to attend their wedding. The judge notes that some of the attorneys may appear before the judge, while the law enforcement personnel currently do not. The judge further asks if it will be necessary to disclose or disqualify after the wedding when any such wedding guests appear before the judge.
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]). Therefore, a judge must not allow family, social, political, or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[B]) and must disqualify in matters where “the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned” (22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]).
It is generally ethically permissible for judges to attend social events with attorneys. For example, in Opinion 22-138, we advised that a judge may attend the wedding of an attorney who regularly appears in the judge’s court, provided the attorney is not on trial before the judge at the time of the event. We further advised that, for two years thereafter, the judge must disclose his/her attendance as a wedding guest when the attorney appears in the judge’s court (see id.; see also generally Opinions 11-101 [judge may attend the wedding of an assistant district attorney who, when initially hired, regularly appeared before judge for approximately one year and still appears before judge occasionally]; 07-141 [judge may attend a party for the spouse of a public defender who regularly appears before the judge, and a religious function for the daughter of a law guardian who regularly appears before the judge, unless either counsel is presently on trial before the judge]; 06-44 [judge may attend wedding of attorney who regularly appears before him/her, and give the couple a gift, but should not attend when attorney is on trial before the judge]; cf. 2006 Ann Rep of NY Commn on Jud Conduct at 193, 194 [when a respondent judge had a close social relationship with an attorney, “[a]t the very least, respondent should have disclosed the relationship so that the parties and their attorneys, could have had an opportunity to consider whether to seek his disqualification”]).
Considering the foregoing, we conclude that this judge may invite attorneys to the wedding, including the judge’s former public sector attorney colleagues, provided that such attorneys are not on trial before the judge at the time of the wedding. For two years after the wedding, if an attorney who was a wedding guest appears in a case, the judge must disclose such attendance.[1]
It is likewise ethically permissible for the judge to invite the future spouse’s law enforcement colleagues to attend the wedding. The mere fact that a member of law enforcement attended a judge’s wedding does not, in and of itself, preclude such judge from presiding over a matter involving that individual, as long as the judge can be fair and impartial. However, if a wedding guest appears before the judge within two years after the wedding, we advise that the judge must disclose their attendance. Absent any other basis for disqualification, the judge is “the sole arbiter of recusal” and this “discretionary decision is within the personal conscience of the court” (People v Moreno, 70 NY2d 403, 405 [1987]).[2]
Lastly, we note that a judge may accept a gift from a friend or relative for a special occasion such as a wedding, anniversary or birthday, “if the gift is fairly commensurate with the occasion and the relationship” (22 NYCRR 100.4[D][5][d]).
[1] Apart from the wedding attendance, the judge may have further obligations based upon his/her relationship with the attorney (see Opinion 11-125).
[2] As a reminder, where a judge’s law enforcement officer spouse “does not hold a supervisory role and is not involved in a particular criminal matter, neither disclosure nor disqualification is required” (Opinion 23-85). However, “[o]nce the judge’s spouse is promoted, the judge must also disqualify from matters involving law enforcement personnel under the spouse’s supervision” (id.).