Opinion No. 01-08

July 25, 2001

Topic: Participation in "specialized" bar associations.

Digest: A judge may not accept complimentary membership as a "judicial fellow" with associated free membership benefits, in a specialized bar association if such membership may give the appearance of favoritism toward a particular class or category of litigants.

References: Illinois Supreme Court Rules 62B, 64, 64C and 65C(4); Shaman, Lubet and Alfini, Judicial Conduct and Ethics, Section 7.28, p. 201 (1990); Lubet, Beyond Reproach: Ethical Restrictions on the Extrajudicial Activities of State and Federal Judges, p. 17 (Am. Judiciary Soc. 1984); Illinois Judicial Ethics Committee Opinion Nos. 93-12 and 95-07.

FACTS

A judge has received a solicitation letter from a "specialized" bar association which has offered to recognize the judge as a "Judicial Fellow". By accepting this recognition, the judge will be entitled to a complimentary subscription to a trial magazine, published by the bar association, and complimentary guest registration at the bar association's annual conventions. Both the publications and the convention will address current legal topics and serve to educate the judge on various aspects of trial law. The "specialized" bar association generally consists of lawyers who represent a single side in legal disputes.

QUESTION

May a judge accept complimentary recognition which includes complimentary legal publications and complimentary registration to conventions of a "specialized" bar association whose member attorneys generally represent a single side in legal disputes?

OPINION

This question calls for a balance between a judge's activity to improve the law, legal system and administration of justice with a judge's obligation to avoid situations "in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned…"

Rule 64 states:

A judge, subject to the proper performance of his or her judicial duties, may engage in the following law-related activities, if in doing so the judge does not cast doubt on his or her capacity to decide impartially any issue that may come before him or her.

* * *

C. A judge may serve as a member…of an organization…devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice.

Shaman, Lubet and Alfini note that:

Judges may freely participate in general bar associations… A further question, however, is raised by membership or participation in "specialized" bar associations, where the judge's involvement may give the appearance of favoritism. Thus, one advisory opinion counseled that a judge could participate in the American Board of Trial Advocates, where the membership was evenly split between plaintiffs' and defendants' lawyers. [Florida Advisory Opinion 95-46]. On the other hand, it is likely to be inappropriate for a judge to belong to an organization of lawyers who represent a single class or category of litigants, although a judge may attend such group's events. [Arizona Advisory Opinion 95-13].

Thus, it would appear that acceptance of membership in a specialized bar association, through recognition as a "Judicial Fellow", would be prohibited if such fellowship status may give the appearance of favoritism. This conclusion is further supported by the proscription in Rule 62B, which states, in pertinent part, that a judge should not "convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge."

However, a prohibition on ongoing membership is not dispositive of the secondary issue of complimentary publications and attendance at the organization's conventions. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 65C(4)(a) states that "a judge may accept a gift incident to a public testimonial to the judge; books supplied by publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or an invitation to the judge and the judge's spouse to attend a bar-related function or activity devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice."

The Committee has opined that a judge may accept an invitation to attend a bar association's golf outing when the outing serves "to honor the judiciary". IJEC Opinion 93-12. The opinion notes that while the outing may purport to honor the judiciary, the judge should nevertheless "be satisfied that his or her attendance at the event does not create the impression that a class of lawyers or their clients are in a special position to influence him" in violation of Rule 62. Further, Rule 64 allows a judge to participate in law-related activities, if in doing so the judge does not cast doubt on his or her capacity to decide impartially.

Finally, Rule 65C(4) permits a judge to accept legal books from publishers on a complimentary basis, and the Committee has interpreted this rule to include the acceptance of CD-ROMS even though the rule does not specifically list this resource. IJEC Opinion 95-7. "The purpose of the rules concerning gifts, including gifts of 'books', is to 'strike a balance between common sense and usage and apparent or actual impropriety'," Shaman, Lubet and Alfini, Judicial Conduct and Ethics, and to avoid conduct which exploits the judicial position or causes frequent disqualifications, Lubet, Beyond Reproach: Ethical Restrictions on the Extrajudicial Activities of State and Federal Judges.

In conclusion, a judge may not accept a membership status as "Judicial Fellow" of a "specialized" bar association as such a membership might reasonably raise questions of the judge's impartiality. A judge may attend a "specialized" bar association's convention when the event serves to honor the judiciary or is a law-related activity concerning the law, the legal system, and/or the administration of justice, but does not raise questions of the judge's impartiality. A judge may accept complimentary publications from a specialized bar association on the same basis as from any other publisher.