Opinion 88-92

September 19, 1988

Topic:          Judge serving as chairperson of an annual, non fund-raising luncheon of a law school alumni association.

Digest:         Judges may serve as chair- persons of a law school alumni association’s nonfund-raising annual luncheon.

Rules:          22 NYCRR §100.2(a), 100.4(c).

Opinion:

         The Advisory Committee has been asked whether a judge may serve as a chairperson of an annual law school alumni luncheon.

         Judges may engage in activities of organizations devoted to the improvement of the law and the legal system, including assisting in the organizations’ fundraising activities. 22 NYCRR §100.4(c). However, such assistance may not include his or her participation in public fundraising activities on behalf of the organization.

         Here, the accredited law school is an organization devoted to the improvement of the law. The luncheon will not include any fundraising activities, but rather its activities will include socializing and listening to updates about the law school. The proceeds from the tickets to the luncheon will be insufficient to cover the costs of the affair, and will therefore be subsidized by the alumni association’s treasury.

         Under all of these circumstances, there is no ethical reason which would prevent any judge from serving as chairperson of such an event.

         This opinion is advisory only and does not bind either the Office of Court Administration or the Commission on Judicial Conduct.

         For example, the part-time associate village justice should not represent a private client in a zoning matter, if there were any possibility that his client might be charged with a violation of a village zoning ordinance, or if the matter were highly controversial. See also, New York State Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics, Opinion #252 (1972).

         The associate village justice’s second question is whether he may commence an Article 78 proceeding against the village or its zoning board in order to challenge an adverse determination to his client’s application for a variance by the zoning board of appeals.

         It would be improper for the associate village justice to represent a claimant against the village in litigation even though the proceeding is in the Supreme Court. His position as an associate village justice is inconsistent and in conflict with prosecuting his client’s actions against the village. Canon 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct provides that a judge should avoid the appearance of impropriety in all his activities, and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. See also, New York State Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics Opinion #308 (1973).

         This opinion is advisory only and does not bind either the Office of Court Administration or the Commission on Judicial Conduct.