The answer is found in the Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges under Rule 3.10. Common Pleas and appellate court judges are prohibited from other forms of employment such as practicing law, but a district judge has some limited rights to practice law. The problem is the rules were amended and now it is very difficult to know exactly what a district judge who is a lawyer can do. The general rule is Rule 3.10, which states the magisterial district judge "shall not engage, directly or indirectly, in any activity or act incompatible with the expeditious, proper, and impartial discharge of their duties, including but not limited to any of the following—; Any activity related to the collection of a claim or judgement for money."

Rule 3.10(b) prohibits a magisterial district judge from exploiting their judicial position for financial gain for any business or professional advantage. In other words, if one is practicing law and doing it as a district judge, they should not call themselves judge in their pleadings, advertisements, letterhead, etc. Under 3.10(b), a magisterial district judge cannot receive any fee for the performance of duties as an arbitrator or mediator. Therefore, district judges who are also doing arbitrations in their local courthouse cannot do the same unless they are not receiving any fee. Under 3.10(e), magisterial district judges who are attorneys cannot practice law before any district judge in the commonwealth and in any proceeding in which they have served as a district judge. They also cannot serve as a lawyer at any criminal proceeding in the county where their magisterial district court is located. See 3.10(e)(4). Further, magisterial district judges who are attorneys cannot practice nor act as an attorney or solicitor for any county or local municipality, or governmental board. Under 3.10(f), magisterial district judges who are attorneys shall not permit their employers, employees, partners, or legal associates to appear or practice before them.