The Committee on Judicial Ethics responds to written inquiries from New York state’s approximately 3,400 judges, who serve both full- and part-time. The committee’s opinions interpret the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct (22NYCRR, Part 100) and the Code of Judicial Conduct. The committee, comprised of 26 current and retired judges and headed by former Justice George D. Marlow, also answers inquiries about proper campaign conduct from candidates for elective judicial office. The New York Law Journal publishes selected recent opinions of the committee.
Digest: (1) Where it appears that an attorney has failed to comply with the attorney registration requirements Judiciary Law §468-a requires, a judge should afford the attorney an opportunity to demonstrate that he/she filed the mandatory registration statement and/or paid the prescribed fee to avoid an unnecessary report to the disciplinary committee. If the attorney is not in compliance with Judiciary Law §468-a, the judge must report the attorney to the appropriate Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for disciplinary action. (2) Where it appears that a nonresident attorney does not maintain a physical law office or an actual mailing address in New York State as Judiciary Law §470 requires, a judge should afford the attorney an opportunity to demonstrate otherwise. If the attorney does not produce satisfactory evidence of compliance, and the judge concludes that the attorney has thereby committed a substantial violation of the Professional Conduct Rules, the judge should take appropriate action. Rules: Judiciary Law §468-a (1), (4), (5); §470; Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, LLP v. Ace Am. Ins. Co., 51 AD3d 580 (1st Dept. 2008); Tatko v. McCarthy, 267 AD2d 583 (3rd Dept. 1999); Matter of Scarsella, 195 AD2d 513 (2nd Dept. 1993); 22 NYCRR 100.2(A); 100.3(D)(2); 118.1(a), (g), (h); Part 1200; Opinions 08-198; 07-129; 07-82; 02-85; 98-95 (Vol. XVII).
