Opinion 23-47

May 4, 2023

Digest: A town justice may accept an invitation from the town board to attend a town board meeting and address questions “for public information” concerning the court’s procedures and limitations with respect to the collection of fees and court security, to help explain and clarify the court’s role in these matters.  The judge may not comment on any pending or impending cases and should be careful not to cast doubt on their integrity, impartiality, and independence in adjudicating matters that could result in revenue for the town.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.0; 100.1; 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.3(B)(8); Opinions 21-26; 19-63; 16-104; 15-215; 89-129.

Opinion:

          The inquiring town justice asks if it is ethically permissible to accept an invitation from the town board to attend a town board meeting and address questions from the public about court fines and court security, such as: “What, if anything, are we doing to clear up and collect the fines? How much of it is noncollectable due to death, etc. How do you get deceased people [off] the list? Do you have enough security during court.”

A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]) and to preserve the judiciary’s independence (see 22 NYCRR 100.1; see also 22 NYCRR 100.0[S] [“An ‘independent’ judiciary is one free of outside influences or control”]).  A judge must not make any public comment about “a pending or impending proceeding in any court within the United States or its territories” (22 NYCRR 100.3[B][8]).  However, this rule “does not prohibit judges from making public statements in the course of their official duties or from explaining for public information the procedures of the court” (id.).

As we have previously observed, while the state constitution establishes the state’s three branches of government and vests specific bodies with authority to discipline, remove, or impeach judges, local town justices may nonetheless meet with town employees and officials in the normal course of their duties, including in the budgeting process (see Opinion 19-63; see e.g. Opinions 89-129 [town justice may appear before the town board to request additional funds to carry out court functions]; 16-104 [prohibition on a village justice or court clerk attending the mayor’s monthly meetings with village “department heads” does not prevent them from attending “an annual budget meeting” or other such occasional meetings “where the judge determines the court’s interests need to be represented”]).  Indeed, we have advised that “a town justice may appear at monthly town board meetings on behalf of the town court if (a) the judge concludes it is in the best interest of the court to attend and (b) the judge is satisfied the agenda reflects the town court’s status as a co-equal branch of government, rather than a department subject to the town board’s direction and control” (Opinion 21-26).

A town justice may also provide information concerning the court’s expenses and revenues to town officials or the general public (see Opinion 16-104).  For example, a town justice may  publicly discuss the court’s operations, including a decrease or increase in revenue, at a town board meeting or public forum, provided the judge (a) is careful not to cast doubt on their integrity, impartiality, and independence in adjudicating matters that could potentially result in revenue for the town and (b) avoids impermissible comment on any identifiable pending or impending case before them (see Opinion 19-63; see also Opinion 15-215 [judge may, “subject to all applicable statutory provisions concerning confidential information or sealed records, present a monthly status report to the town or village board at a public board meeting”]).

We conclude that the inquiring town justice may accept an invitation to attend a town board meeting and address basic questions from the public concerning the court’s procedures and limitations with respect to the collection of fees and court security, in order to explain and clarify the court’s role in these matters for public information (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[B][8]).  The judge may not comment on any pending or impending cases and should be careful not to cast doubt on the judge’s integrity, impartiality, and independence in adjudicating matters that could result in revenue for the town.