Opinion No. 01-01

May 1, 2001

Topic: Disqualification from hearing cases that were pending at judge's former law firm while judge was practicing there.

Digest: A judge is disqualified from hearing all cases that were pending at the judge's former law firm while the judge was practicing there. The judge is further disqualified from hearing cases involving the judge's former firm for a period of three years after the judge left the firm, whether or not the case was pending at the time the judge was practicing there. Finally, a judge is disqualified from hearing all cases within seven years after the judge left the firm which involves a client that the judge represented while practicing with the firm.

References: Illinois Supreme Court Rules 63C(1)(b) and 63C(1)(c); Illinois Judicial Ethics Committee Opinion Nos. 93-10, 94-16 and 95-15.

FACTS

A judge has an agreement with the judge's former law firm entitling the judge to receive a percentage of the fee earned on approximately five to six cases on which the judge worked while with the firm.

QUESTION

On what cases involving the judge's former law firm is the judge disqualified?

OPINION

There are essentially three kinds of cases involving the judge's former law firm from which the judge is disqualified:

First, the judge is disqualified from hearing all cases that were pending at the judge's former law firm while the judge was practicing there. Under Supreme Court Rule 63C(1)(b), disqualification extends to cases on which either the judge or other lawyers in the firm worked while the judge practiced with the firm. Rule 63C(1)(b) requires disqualification if "the judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter…" See IJEC Opinion No. 95-15 (judge was disqualified from hearing case in which one of the lawyers worked while a partner with the judge). Assuming that the judge is entitled to a referral fee only on cases pending at the judge's former law firm when the judge was still practicing there, Rule 63C(1)(b) disqualifies the judge from all such cases.1

Second, the judge is disqualified from hearing all cases involving the judge's former firm for a period of three years after the judge left the firm. Under Supreme Court Rule 63C(1)(c), disqualification is required regardless of whether the firm had the case while the judge was practicing there. Rule 63C(1)(c) requires disqualification if "the judge was, within the preceding three years, associated in the private practice of law with any firm…currently representing any party in the controversy…" But cf. IJEC Opinion No. 93-10 (three-year rule for disqualification from cases involving former law firm did not apply to judge who left firm nine years previously).

Third, the judge is disqualified from hearing all cases, within seven years after the judge left the law firm, involving a client that the judge represented while practicing with the firm. Supreme Court Rule 63C(1)(c) requires disqualification "for a period of seven years following the last date on which the judge represented any party to the controversy while the judge was an attorney in the private practice of law." Disqualification is required even if the judge's representation of the client did not involve the matter now before the Court.