COMMITTEE ON CODES OF CONDUCT
ADVISORY OPINION NO. 17
Travel and Hotel Expenses -- Judge and a Family Member.
A judge's inquiry concerning acceptance of hospitality extended
by lawyers has prompted the Committee to reconsider the topic, which was
the subject of the original Advisory Opinion No. 17, issued in 1970. The
pertinent canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges are Canon
2, which enjoins a judge to avoid the appearance of impropriety, Canon
2B which provides that a judge should not lend the prestige of judicial
office to advance the private interests of others, nor convey or permit
others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to
influence the judge, and Canon 6B, which permits reimbursement for extra-judicial
activities permitted by the Code, limited to the actual cost of travel,
food, and lodging reasonably incurred by the judge and, where appropriate
to the occasion, by the judge's spouse or relative. Also relevant are the
Ethics Reform Act Gift Regulations, § 5, which permit judges to accept
invitations to bar-related functions, ordinary social hospitality, and
appropriate gifts from relatives and friends.
Application of these standards to the context of hospitality extended
by lawyers requires recognition of both the need to avoid the appearance
of impropriety and the appropriateness of encouraging judges to maintain
collegial relationships with members of the bar. We consider the matter
separately with respect to lawyer organizations, law firms, and individual
lawyers.
When hospitality is extended by lawyer organizations, the risk of
an appearance of impropriety is markedly reduced, compared to hospitality
conferred by a particular law firm or lawyer. Section 5(a) of the Gift
Regulations specifically authorizes acceptance of an invitation for the
judge and a family member to attend bar-related functions. We see no impropriety
if a judge and spouse are reimbursed for hotel and travel expenses reasonably
required for their attendance at dinners and similar social events sponsored
by lawyer organizations such as bar associations. Appearance of impropriety
might arise, however, if the hospitality was extended by lawyer organizations
identified with a particular viewpoint regularly advanced in litigation.
Hospitality extended by a law firm obviously can more readily raise
questions about the appearance of impropriety. Also, the Gift Regulations,
§ 5(j), restrict judges from accepting gifts from persons who have
come or are likely to come before the judge or who have an interest in
the performance of the judge's official duties. In this context, we believe
that a judge and spouse may attend cocktail parties hosted by law firms
in connection with bar association gatherings and an infrequent dinner
commemorating a firm's significant anniversary, but should not accept hotel
and travel expense reimbursement.
Hospitality of an individual lawyer is a matter of private social
relationships. The Gift Regulations, §§ 5(c), (d), and (e), permit
judges to accept ordinary social hospitality and appropriate gifts from
relatives and friends. Individual determinations must be made as to the
appropriate extent of such relationships and the point at which such relationships
warrant recusal from cases in which the lawyer appears.
Finally, attention should be called to Advisory Opinion Nos. 3 and
67, which permit attendance of a judge and spouse, and reimbursement for
maintenance and travel expenses, at seminars and similar proceedings at
which the judge is invited to lecture or render similar
services.
January 21, 1970
Revised [date unknown]
Revised July 10, 1998