CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
JUDICIAL COUNCIL COMMITTEE'S NOTE, 1979: The following rules, called the code of
judicial ethics, govern the members of the Wisconsin judiciary. These rules were originally adopted by the
supreme court on November 14, 1967, effective January 1, 1968. They were amended on June 28, 1974; December
23, 1977, March 16, 1978; March 28, 1978; and November 20, 1979. The rules were originally numbered standards
1 to 16 and rules 1 to 17. They have
been clarified and numbered 60.001 to 60.19 for uniformity and convenience.
PREAMBLE
Our legal
system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent
judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to
American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all provisions of this Code are
the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor
the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain
confidence in our legal system. The
judge is an arbiter of facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a
highly visible symbol of government under the rule of law.
The rules
of the Code of Judicial Conduct are authoritative. The Commentary, has three varying
functions: 1) to elaborate a standard in
the rules; 2) to set forth policy bases for the rules; or 3) by explanation and
example, to provide guidance with respect to the purpose and meaning of the
rules. The Commentary is not intended as
a statement of additional rules.
When the
text of a rule uses "shall," "shall not" or "may
not," it is intended to impose binding obligations the violation of which
can result in disciplinary action. For
a judge's conduct to constitute a violation of a rule, the judge must have known
or reasonably should have known the facts giving rise to the violation.
The use
of "should" or "should not" in the rules is intended to
encourage or discourage specific conduct and as a statement of what is or is
not appropriate conduct but not as a binding rule under which a judge may be
disciplined. When "may" is
used, it denotes permissible discretion or, depending on the context, it refers
to action that is not covered by specific proscriptions.
The
provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct are rules of reason. They should be applied consistent with
constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules and decisional law and
in the context of all relevant circumstances.
The Code is to be construed so as not to impinge on the essential independence
of judges in making judicial decisions.
The Code
is designed to provide guidance to judges and candidates for judicial office
and to provide a structure for regulating conduct through disciplinary
agencies. It is not designed or intended
as a basis for civil liability or criminal prosecution. Furthermore, the purpose of the Code would be
subverted if the Code were invoked by lawyers or litigants for mere tactical
advantage in a proceeding.
The
provisions of the Code are intended to govern conduct of judges and to be
binding upon them. It is not intended,
however, that every transgression will result in disciplinary action. Whether disciplinary action is appropriate,
and the degree of discipline to be imposed, should be determined through a
reasonable and reasoned application of the text and should depend on such
factors as the seriousness of the transgression, whether there is a pattern of
improper activity and the effect of the improper activity on others or on the
judicial system. See ABA
Standards Relating to Judicial Discipline and Disability Retirement.
Because
it is not possible to address every conceivable conduct of a judge that might
erode public confidence in the integrity, independence and impartiality of the
judiciary, some of the binding rules of the Code are cast in general terms
setting forth the principles their specific provisions are intended to
foster. See, for example, SCR
60.02, 60.03(1) and 60.05(1) and accompanying Comments. Those rules provide a touchstone against
which judicial conduct, actual or contemplated, is to be measured. Care must be taken that the Code's
necessarily general rules do not constitute a trap for the unwary judge or a
weapon to be wielded unscrupulously against a judge.
The Code
of Judicial Conduct is not intended as an exhaustive guide for the conduct of
judges. They should also be governed in
their judicial and personal conduct by general ethical standards. The Code is intended, however, to state basic
standards which should govern the conduct of all judges and to provide guidance
to assist judges in establishing and maintaining high standards of judicial and
personal conduct.
SCR 60.01
Definitions.
In this
chapter:
(1) "Appropriate authority" means the
chief judge of an offending judge's district, the director of state courts, the
judicial commission, and the office of lawyer regulation.
(2) "Candidate" means a person seeking selection for or
retention of a judicial office by means of election or appointment who makes a
public announcement of candidacy, declares or files as a candidate with the
election or appointment authority, or authorizes solicitation or acceptance of
contributions or support.
(3) "Court personnel" means staff,
court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control,
including judicial assistants, reporters, law clerks, and bailiffs. "Court personnel" does not include
the lawyers in a judicial proceeding.
(4) "De minimis" means an
insignificant interest that does not raise reasonable question as to a judge's
impartiality or use of the prestige of the office.
(5) "Economic interest" means ownership
of a more than de minimis legal or equitable interest, or a
relationship as officer, director, advisor or other active participant in the
affairs of a party, except that none of the following is an economic interest:
(a) Ownership of an interest in a mutual or
common investment fund that holds securities, unless the judge participates in
the management of the fund or unless a proceeding pending or impending before
the judge could substantially affect the value of the interest.
(b) Service by a judge as an officer, director,
advisor or other active participant in an educational, religious, charitable,
fraternal or civic organization, or service by a judge's spouse or child as an
officer, director, advisor or other active participant in any organization.
(c) A deposit in a financial institution, the
proprietary interest of a policyholder in a mutual insurance company, of a
depositor in a mutual savings association or of a member in a credit union, or
a similar proprietary interest, unless a proceeding pending or impending before
the judge could substantially affect the value of the interest.
(d) Ownership of government securities, unless a
proceeding pending or impending before the judge could substantially affect the
value of the securities.
(6) "Fiduciary" means a personal
representative, trustee, attorney-in-fact, conservator or guardian.
(7) "Gift" means the payment or receipt of
anything of value without valuable consideration.
(7m) "Impartiality"
means the absence of bias or prejudice in
favor of, or against, particular parties, or classes of parties,
as well as maintaining an open mind in considering issues that may come before
the judge.
(8) "Judge" means a justice of the supreme court, a judge of the court of appeals, a judge of the circuit court, a reserve judge, a municipal judge, a court commissioner, and anyone, whether or not a lawyer, who is an officer of the judicial system and who performs judicial functions.
(8m) "Judge-elect" means a person who has
been elected or appointed to judicial office but has not yet taken office.
(9) "Knowingly" or
"knowledge" means actual knowledge of the fact in question, which may
be inferred from the circumstances.
(10) "Law" means court rules, statutes, constitutional provisions and legal conclusions in published court decisions.
(11) "Member of the judge's family"
means the judge's spouse, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent and any other
relative or person with whom the judge maintains a close familial relationship.
(12) "Member of the judge's family residing
in the judge's household" means a relative of the judge by blood or
marriage or a person treated by the judge as a member of the judge's family who
resides in the judge's household.
(13) "Nonpublic information" means
information that, by law, is not available to the public, including information
that is sealed by statute or court order, impounded or communicated in camera,
offered in grand jury proceedings or contained in presentencing reports,
dependency case reports or psychiatric reports.
(14) "Part-time municipal judge" or
"part-time court commissioner" means a judge or court commissioner
who serves repeatedly on a part-time basis by election or under a continuing
appointment.
(15) "Require" means the exercise of
reasonable direction and control over the conduct of those persons subject to
the directions and control.
(16) "Third degree of kinship" means a
person who is related as a great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, uncle, aunt,
brother, sister, child, grandchild, great-grandchild, nephew or niece.
SCR
60.02 A judge shall uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
An
independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our
society. A judge should participate in
establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct and shall
personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of
the judiciary will be preserved. This
chapter applies to every aspect of judicial behavior except purely legal
decisions. Legal decisions made in the
course of judicial duty on the record are subject solely to judicial
review.
COMMENT
Deference
to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the
integrity and independence of the judges.
The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn upon their
acting without fear or favor. Although
judges should be independent, they must comply with the law, including the
provisions of this chapter. Public
confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary is maintained by the adherence
of each judge to this responsibility.
Conversely, violation of this chapter diminishes public confidence in
the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government under law.
The
role of the judicial conduct organization like the Wisconsin Judicial
Commission is not that of an appellate court.
Wis. Admin. Code Sec. JC 3.06 (May 1979) states as follows: "Commission not to act as appellate
court. The commission may not
function as an appellate court to review the decisions of a court or judge or
to exercise superintending or administrative control over determinations of
courts or judges." It is important
to remember this concept as one interprets this chapter, particularly in light
of the practice of some groups or individuals to encourage dissatisfied
litigants to file simultaneous appeals and judicial conduct complaints.
SCR
60.03 A judge shall avoid impropriety
and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge's activities.
(1) A judge shall respect and comply with the law
and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the
integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
COMMENT
Public
confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct of
judges. A judge must avoid all
impropriety and appearance of impropriety.
A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on
the judge's conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen
and should do so freely and willingly.
The
prohibition against behaving with impropriety or the appearance of impropriety
applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a judge. Because it is not practicable to list all
prohibited acts, the proscription is necessarily cast in general terms that
extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned
in the chapter. Actual improprieties
under this standard include violations of law, court rules or other specific
provisions of this chapter. The test for
appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable
minds a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial
responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired.
Restrictions
on the personal conduct of judges cannot, however, be so onerous as to deprive
them of fundamental freedoms enjoyed by other citizens. Care must be taken to achieve a balance
between the need to maintain the integrity and dignity of the judiciary and the
right of judges to conduct their personal lives in accordance with the dictates
of their individual consciences.
In
striking this balance the following factors should be considered:
(a) the degree to which the personal conduct is
public or private;
(b) the degree to which the personal conduct is a
protected individual right;
(c) the potential for the personal conduct to
directly harm or offend others;
(d) the degree to which the personal conduct is
indicative of bias or prejudice on the part of the judge;
(e) the degree to which the personal conduct is
indicative of the judge's lack of respect for the public or the judicial/legal
system.
See
also Comment to sub. (3).
(2) A judge may not allow family, social,
political or other relationships to influence the judge's judicial conduct or
judgment. A judge may not lend the
prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or of
others or convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a
special position to influence the judge. A judge may not testify voluntarily as
a character witness.
COMMENT
Maintaining
the prestige of judicial office is essential to a system of government in which
the judiciary functions independently of the executive and legislative
branches. Respect for the judicial
office facilitates the orderly conduct of legitimate judicial functions. Judges should distinguish between proper and
improper use of the prestige of office in all of their activities. For example, it would be improper for a judge
to allude to his or her judgeship to gain a personal advantage such as
deferential treatment when stopped by a police officer for a traffic
offense. Similarly, judicial letterhead
must not be used for conducting a judge's personal business.
A
judge must avoid lending the prestige of judicial office for the advancement of
the private interests of others. For
example, a judge must not use the judge's judicial position to gain advantage
in a civil suit involving a member of the judge's family. As to the acceptance of awards, see
SCR 60.05 (4) (e) 1.
Although
a judge should be sensitive to possible abuse of the prestige of office, a
judge may, based on the judge's personal knowledge, serve as a reference or
provide a letter of recommendation. Such
a letter should not be written if the person who is the subject of the letter
is or is likely to be a litigant engaged in a contested proceeding before the
court. However, a judge must not
initiate the communication of information to a sentencing judge or a probation
or corrections officer but may provide to such persons information for the
record in response to a formal request.
Judges
may participate in the process of judicial selection by cooperating with
appointing authorities and screening committees seeking names for consideration
and by responding to official inquiries concerning a person being considered
for a judgeship.
A
judge must not testify voluntarily as a character witness because to do so may
lend the prestige of the judicial office in support of the party for whom the
judge testifies. Moreover, when a judge
testifies as a witness, a lawyer who regularly appears before the judge may be
placed in the awkward position of cross-examining the judge. A judge may, however, testify when properly
summoned. Except in unusual
circumstances where the demands of justice require, a judge should discourage a
party from requiring the judge to testify as a character witness.
(3) A judge may not hold membership in any
organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race,
gender, religion or national origin.
COMMENT
Membership
of a judge in an organization that practices invidious discrimination gives
rise to perceptions that the judge's impartiality is impaired. Whether an organization practices invidious
discrimination is often a complex question to which judges should be sensitive. The answer cannot be determined from a mere
examination of an organization's current membership rolls but rather depends on
how the organization selects members and other relevant factors, such as that
the organization is dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic or
cultural values of legitimate common interest to its members or that it is in
fact and effect an intimate, purely private organization whose membership
limitations could not be constitutionally prohibited.
Whether
an organization, club or group is "private" depends on a review of
the following factors: 1) size; 2)
purpose; 3) policies; 4) selectivity in membership; 5) congeniality; and 6)
whether others are excluded from critical aspects of the relationship. An organization that is not
"private" is generally said to discriminate invidiously if it
arbitrarily excludes from membership on the basis of race, religion, sex or
national origin persons who would otherwise be admitted to membership. See, New York State Club Ass'n.
Inc. v. City of New York, 108 S. Ct. 2225, 101 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1988); Board
of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537
(1987), 95 L. Ed. 2d 474; Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609
(1984). Organizations dedicated to the
preservation of religious, fraternal, sororal, spiritual, charitable, civic or
cultural values which do not stigmatize any excluded persons as inferior and
therefore unworthy of membership are not considered to discriminate
invidiously.
Public
manifestation by a judge of the judge's knowing approval of invidious
discrimination on any basis gives the appearance of impropriety and diminishes
public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
When
a judge has reason to believe that an organization to which the judge belongs
engages in invidious discrimination that would preclude membership under sub.
(3) or under SCR 60.03, the judge may, in lieu of resigning, make immediate
efforts to have the organization discontinue its invidiously discriminatory
practices but must suspend participation in any other activities of the
organization. If the organization fails
to discontinue its invidiously discriminatory practices as promptly as
possible, the judge must resign from the organization.
SCR
60.04 A judge shall perform the duties
of judicial office impartially and diligently.
The
judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge's other
activities. The judge's judicial duties
include all the duties of the judge's office prescribed by law.
(1) In the performance of the duties under this
section, the following apply to adjudicative responsibilities:
(a) A judge shall hear and decide matters
assigned to the judge, except those in which recusal is required under sub. (4)
or disqualification is required under section 757.19 of the statutes and except
when judge substitution is requested and granted.
(b) A judge shall be faithful to the law and
maintain professional competence in it.
A judge may not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear
of criticism.
(c) A judge shall require order and decorum in
proceedings before the judge.
(d) A judge shall be patient, dignified and
courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the
judge deals in an official capacity and shall require similar conduct of
lawyers, staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and
control. During trials and hearings, a
judge shall act so that the judge's attitude, manner or tone toward counsel or
witnesses does not prevent the proper presentation of the cause or the
ascertainment of the truth. A judge may
properly intervene if the judge considers it necessary to clarify a point or
expedite the proceedings.
COMMENT
The
duty to hear all proceedings fairly and with patience is not inconsistent with
the duty to dispose promptly of the business of the court. Judges can be efficient and businesslike
while being patient and deliberate.
In
respect to sub. (c), by order of June 4, 1996, the Supreme Court adopted
Standards of Courtesy and Decorum for the Courts of Wisconsin, chapter 62 of
the Supreme Court Rules.
(e) A judge shall perform judicial duties without
bias or prejudice. A judge may not, in
the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or
prejudice, including bias or prejudice based upon race, gender, religion,
national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status,
and may not knowingly permit staff, court officials and others subject to the
judge's direction and control to do so.
COMMENT
A
judge must refrain from speech, gestures or other conduct that could reasonably
be perceived as sexual harassment and must require the same standard of conduct
of others subject to the judge's direction and control.
A
judge must perform judicial duties impartially and fairly. A judge who manifests bias on any basis in a
proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings the judiciary into
disrepute. Facial expression and body
language, in addition to oral communication, can give to parties or lawyers in
the proceedings, jurors, the media and others an appearance of judicial
bias. A judge must be alert to avoid
behavior that may be perceived as prejudicial.
(f) A judge shall require lawyers in proceedings
before the judge to refrain from manifesting, by words or conduct, bias or
prejudice based upon race, gender, religion, national origin, disability, age,
sexual orientation or socioeconomic status against parties, witnesses, counsel
or others. This subsection does not
preclude legitimate advocacy when race, gender, religion, national origin, disability,
age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status or other similar factors are
issues in the proceeding.
(g) A judge shall accord to every person who has
a legal interest in a proceeding, or to that person's lawyer, the right to be
heard according to law. A judge may not
initiate, permit, engage in or consider ex parte communications concerning a
pending or impending action or proceeding except that:
1. A judge may initiate, permit, engage in or
consider ex parte communications for scheduling, administrative purposes or
emergencies that do not deal with substantive matters or issues on the merits
if all of the following conditions are met:
a. The judge reasonably believes that no party
will gain a procedural or tactical advantage as a result of the ex parte
communication.
b. When the ex parte communication may affect
the substance of the action or
proceeding, the judge promptly notifies all of the other parties of the
substance of the ex parte communication and allows each party an opportunity to
respond.
2. A judge may obtain the advice of a
disinterested expert on the law applicable to a proceeding before the judge if
the judge gives notice to the parties of the person consulted and the substance
of the advice and affords the parties reasonable opportunity to respond.
3. A judge may consult with other judges or with
court personnel whose function is to aid the judge in carrying out the judge's
adjudicative responsibilities.
4. A judge may, with the consent of the parties,
confer separately with the parties and their lawyers in an effort to settle
matters pending before the judge.
`
5. A judge may initiate, permit, engage in or
consider ex parte communications when expressly authorized by law.
COMMENT
The
proscription against communications concerning a proceeding includes
communications from lawyers, law teachers, and other persons who are not
participants in the proceeding, except to the limited extent permitted.
To
the extent reasonably possible, all parties or their lawyers shall be included
in communications with a judge.
Whenever
presence of a party or notice to a party is required by SCR 60.04 (1) (g), it
is the party's lawyer, or if the party is unrepresented, the party, who is to
be present or to whom notice is to be given.
An
appropriate and often desirable procedure for a court to obtain the advice of a
disinterested expert on legal issues is to invite the expert to file a brief amicus
curiae.
Certain
ex parte communication is approved by SCR 60.04 (1) (g) to facilitate
scheduling and other administrative purposes and to accommodate
emergencies. In general, however, a
judge must discourage ex parte communication and allow it only if all the criteria
stated in SCR 60.04 (1) (g) are clearly met.
A judge must disclose to all parties all ex parte communications
described in SCR 60.04 (1) (g) 1 and 2 regarding a proceeding pending or
impending before the judge.
A
judge must not independently investigate facts in a case and must consider only
the evidence presented.
A
judge may request a party to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions
of law, so long as the other parties are apprised of the request and are given
an opportunity to respond to the proposed findings and conclusions.
A
judge should not accept trial briefs that are not exchanged with adversary
parties unless all parties agree otherwise in advance of submission of the
briefs.
A
judge must make reasonable efforts, including the provision of appropriate
supervision, to ensure that SCR 60.04 (1) (g) is not violated through law
clerks or other personnel on the judge's staff.
If
communication between the trial judge and the appellate court with respect to a
proceeding is permitted, a copy of any written communication or the substance
of any oral communication should be provided to all parties.
The
prohibition of a lawyer's ex parte communication with a judge and others is set
forth in SCR 20:3.5.
(h) A judge shall dispose of all judicial matters
promptly, efficiently and fairly.
COMMENT
In
disposing of matters promptly, efficiently and fairly, a judge must demonstrate
due regard for the rights of the parties to be heard and to have issues
resolved without unnecessary cost or delay.
Containing costs while preserving fundamental rights of parties also
protects the interests of witnesses and the general public. A judge should monitor and supervise cases so
as to reduce or eliminate dilatory practices, avoidable delays and unnecessary
costs. A judge should encourage and seek
to facilitate settlement, but parties should not feel coerced into surrendering
the right to have their controversy resolved by the courts.
Prompt
disposition of the court's business requires a judge to devote adequate time to
judicial duties, to be punctual in attending court and expeditious in
determining matters under submission, and to insist that court officials,
litigants and their lawyers cooperate with the judge to that end.
(j) A judge may not, while a proceeding is pending
or impending in any court, make any public comment that may reasonably be
expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of the proceeding. The
judge shall require court personnel subject to the judge's direction and
control to similarly abstain from comment.
This subsection does not prohibit a judge from making public statements
in the course of his or her official duties or from explaining for public
information the procedures of the court.
This paragraph does not apply to proceedings in which the judge is a
litigant in a personal capacity.
COMMENT
The
requirement that judges abstain from public comment regarding a pending or
impending proceeding continues during any appellate process and until final
disposition. This paragraph does not
prohibit a judge from commenting on proceedings in which the judge is a
litigant in a personal capacity, but in cases such as a writ of mandamus
where the judge is a litigant in an official capacity, the judge must not
comment publicly.
(k) A judge may not commend or criticize jurors
for their verdict other than in a court order or opinion in a proceeding but
may express appreciation to jurors for their service to the judicial system and
the community.
COMMENT
Commending
or criticizing jurors for their verdict may imply a judicial expectation in
future cases and may impair a juror's ability to be fair and impartial in a
subsequent case.
(m) A judge may not disclose or use, for any
purpose unrelated to judicial duties, nonpublic information acquired in a
judicial capacity.
(o) A judge shall cooperate with other judges as
members of a common judicial system to promote the satisfactory administration
of justice.
(2) In the performance of the duties under this
section, the following apply to administrative responsibilities:
(a) A judge shall diligently discharge the
judge's administrative responsibilities without bias or prejudice and maintain
professional competence in judicial administration, and should cooperate with
other judges and court officials in the administration of court business.
(b) A judge shall require staff, court officials
and others subject to the judge's direction and control to observe the
standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the judge and to refrain from
manifesting bias or prejudice in the performance of their official duties.
(c) A judge may not make unnecessary
appointments. A judge shall exercise the
power of appointment impartially and on the basis of merit. A judge shall avoid nepotism and
favoritism. A judge may not approve
compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.
COMMENT
Appointees
of a judge include assigned counsel, officials such as referees, commissioners,
special masters, receivers and guardians, and personnel, such as clerks,
judicial assistants and bailiffs.
Consent by the parties to an appointment or an award of compensation
does not relieve the judge of the obligation prescribed by SCR 60.04 (2)
(c).
(3) In the performance of the duties under this
section the following apply to disciplinary responsibilities:
(a) A judge who receives information indicating a
substantial likelihood that another judge has committed a violation of this
chapter should take appropriate action.
A judge having personal knowledge that another judge has committed a
violation of this chapter that raises a substantial question as to the other
judge's fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.
(b) A judge who receives information indicating a
substantial likelihood that a lawyer has committed a violation of the rules of
professional conduct for attorneys should take appropriate action. A judge having personal knowledge that a
lawyer has committed a violation of the rules of professional conduct for
attorneys that raises a substantial question as to the lawyer's honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects shall inform the
appropriate authority. This paragraph
does not require a judge to report conduct disclosed through a judge's
participation in a group to assist ill or disabled judges or lawyers when such
information is acquired in the course of assisting an ill or disabled judge or
lawyer.
(c) Acts of a judge, in the discharge of
disciplinary responsibilities, required or permitted under par. (a) or (b) are
part of a judge's judicial duties and shall be absolutely privileged and no
civil action predicated on those acts may be instituted against the judge.
COMMENT
Appropriate
action may include direct communication with the judge or lawyer who has
committed the violation, other direct action if available, and reporting the
violation to an appropriate authority or other agency or body.
(4) Except as provided in sub. (6) for waiver, a
judge shall recuse himself or herself in a proceeding when the facts and
circumstances the judge knows or reasonably should know establish one of the
following or when reasonable, well-informed persons knowledgeable about
judicial ethics standards and the justice system and aware of the facts and
circumstances the judge knows or reasonably should know would reasonably
question the judge's ability to be impartial:
COMMENT
Under
this rule, a judge must recuse himself or herself whenever the facts and
circumstances the judge knows or reasonably should know raise reasonable
question of the judge's ability to act impartially, regardless of whether any
of the specific rules in SCR 60.04 (4) applies.
For example, if a judge were in the process of negotiating for
employment with a law firm, the judge would be required to recuse himself or
herself from any matters in which that law firm appeared, unless the recusal was waived by the parties after
disclosure by the judge.
Section
757.19 of the statutes sets forth the circumstances under which a judge is
required by law to disqualify himself or herself from any civil or criminal
action or proceeding and establishes the procedures for disqualification and
waiver.
A
judge should disclose on the record information that the judge believes the
parties or their lawyers might consider relevant to the question of recusal,
even if the judge believes there is no real basis for recusal.
By
decisional law, the rule of necessity may override the rule of recusal. For example, a judge might be required to
participate in judicial review of a judicial salary statute or might be the
only judge available in a matter requiring immediate judicial action, such as a
hearing on probable cause or temporary restraining order. In the latter case, the judge must disclose
on the record the basis for possible recusal and use reasonable efforts to
transfer the matter to another judge as soon as practicable.
(a) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice
concerning a party or a party's lawyer or personal knowledge of disputed
evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding.
COMMENT
As a
general matter, for recusal to be required under this provision, the personal
bias or prejudice for or against a party or the personal knowledge of disputed
facts must come from an extrajudicial source.
A bias or prejudice requiring recusal most often arises from a prior
personal relationship but may arise from strong personal feelings about the
alleged conduct of a party. If a judge's
personal bias or prejudice concerning a party's lawyer is of such a degree as
to be likely to transfer to the party, the judge's recusal is required under
this provision.
(b) The judge of an appellate court previously
handled the action or proceeding as judge of another court.
(c) 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, or the judge has
been a material witness concerning the matter.
COMMENT
A
lawyer in a government agency does not ordinarily have an association with
other lawyers employed by that agency within the meaning of SCR 60.04 (4) (c);
a judge formerly employed by a government agency, however, should recuse
himself or herself in a proceeding if the judge's impartiality reasonably may
be questioned because of such association.
(d) The judge knows that he or she, individually
or as a fiduciary, or the judge's spouse or minor child wherever residing, or
any other member of the judge's family residing in the judge's household has an
economic interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the
proceeding or has any other more than de minimis interest that
could be substantially affected by the proceeding.
COMMENT
A
financial interest requiring recusal does not occur solely because the judge is
a member of a political or taxing body that is a party or is a ratepayer to a
party. The test then remains whether the
judge's interest as a taxpayer or ratepayer could be substantially affected by
the outcome.
(e) The judge or the judge's spouse, or a person
within the third degree of kinship to either of them, or the spouse of such a
person meets one of the following criteria:
1. Is a party to the proceeding or an officer,
director or trustee of a party.
2. Is acting as a lawyer in the
proceeding.
3. Is known by the judge to have a more than de
minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the
proceeding.
4.
Is to the judge's
knowledge likely to be a material witness
In the proceeding.
(f) The judge, while a judge or a candidate for
judicial office,
has made a public statement that commits, or appears to
commit, the judge with respect to any of the following:
1. An issue in the proceeding.
2. The controversy in the proceeding.
COMMENT
The
fact that a lawyer in a proceeding is affiliated with a law firm with which a
relative of the judge is affiliated does not of itself require the judge's
recusal. Under appropriate
circumstances, the fact that the judge's impartiality may reasonably be questioned
or that the relative is known by the judge to have an interest in the law firm
that could be "substantially affected by the outcome of the
proceeding" may require the judge's recusal.
Recusal
is not required under this provision if the judge determines on the record that
a subpoena purporting to make his or her relative a witness is false, sham or
frivolous.
(5) A judge shall keep informed of the judge's
own personal and fiduciary economic interests and make a reasonable effort to
keep informed of the personal economic interests of the judge's spouse and
minor children residing in the judge's household, having due regard for the
confidentiality of the spouse's business.
(6) A judge required to recuse himself or herself
under sub. (4) may disclose on the record the basis of the judge's recusal and
may ask the parties and their lawyers to consider, out of the presence of the
judge, whether to waive recusal. If,
following disclosure of any basis for recusal other than personal bias or
prejudice concerning a party, the parties and lawyers, without participation by
the judge, all agree that the judge should not be required to recuse himself or
herself and the judge is then willing to participate, the judge may participate
in the proceeding. The agreement shall
be incorporated in the record of the proceeding.
COMMENT
A
waiver procedure provides the parties an opportunity to proceed without delay
if they wish to waive the recusal. To
assure that consideration of the question of waiver is made independently of
the judge, a judge must not solicit, seek or hear comments on a possible waiver
of the recusal unless the lawyers jointly propose a waiver after consultation
as provided in the rule. A party may act
through counsel if counsel represents on the record that the party has been
consulted and consents. As a practical
matter, a judge may wish to have all parties and their lawyers sign the waiver
agreement.
SCR
60.05 A judge shall so conduct the
judge's extra-judicial activities as to minimize the risk of conflict with
judicial obligations.
(1) Extra-judicial Activities in General. A judge shall conduct all of the judge's
extra-judicial activities so that they do none of the following:
(a) Cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity
to act impartially as a judge.
(b) Demean the judicial office.
(c) Interfere with the proper performance of
judicial duties.
COMMENT
Complete
separation of a judge from extra-judicial activities is neither possible nor
wise; a judge should not become isolated from the community in which the judge
lives.
Expressions
of bias or prejudice by a judge, even outside the judge's judicial activities,
may cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a
judge. See SCR 60.03 (1) and
(3).
(2) Avocational Activities. A judge may speak, write, lecture, teach and
participate in other extra-judicial activities concerning the law, the legal
system, the administration of justice and nonlegal subjects, subject to the
requirements of this chapter.
COMMENT
As a
judicial officer and person specially learned in the law, a judge is in a
unique position to contribute to the improvement of the law, the legal system,
and the administration of justice, including revision of substantive and
procedural law and improvement of criminal and juvenile justice. To the extent that time permits, a judge is
encouraged to do so, either independently or through a bar association,
judicial conference or other organization dedicated to the improvement of the
law. Judges may participate in efforts
to promote the fair administration of justice, the independence of the
judiciary and the integrity of the legal profession and may express opposition
to the persecution of lawyers and judges in other countries because of their
professional activities.
In
this and other subsections of SCR 60.05, the phrase "subject to the
requirements of this chapter" is used, notably in connection with a
judge's governmental, civic or charitable activities. This phrase is included to remind judges that
the use of permissive language in various provisions of the chapter does not
relieve a judge from the other requirements of the chapter that apply to the
specific conduct.
(3) Governmental, Civic or Charitable
Activities.
(a) A judge may not appear at a public hearing
before, or otherwise consult with, an executive or legislative body or official
except on matters concerning the law, the legal system or the administration of
justice or except when acting pro se in a matter involving the
judge or the judge's interests.
COMMENT
See
SCR 60.03 (2) regarding the obligation to avoid improper influence.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (3)(a) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(b) A judge may not accept appointment to a
governmental committee or commission or other governmental position that is
concerned with issues of fact or policy on matters other than the improvement
of the law, the legal system or the administration of justice. A judge may represent a country, state or
locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational
or cultural activities and may serve on a governmental or private committee,
commission or board concerned with historical, educational or cultural
activities. A judge may serve in any
branch of military reserves and be called to duty in the active military.
COMMENT
A
judge is prohibited from accepting any governmental position except one
relating to the law, legal system or administration of justice as authorized by
par. (c). The appropriateness of
accepting extra-judicial assignments must be assessed in light of the demands
on judicial resources created by crowded dockets and the need to protect the
courts from involvement in extra-judicial matters that may prove to be
controversial. Judges should not accept
governmental appointments that are likely to interfere with the effectiveness
and independence of the judiciary.
This
provision does not govern a judge's service in a non-governmental
position. See par. (c) permitting
service by a judge with organizations devoted to the improvement of the law,
the legal system or the administration of justice and with educational,
religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organizations not conducted for
profit. For example, service on the
board of a public educational institution, unless it were a law school, would
be prohibited, but service on the board of a public law school or any private
educational institution would generally be permitted under par. (c).
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (3)(b) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(c) A judge may serve as an officer, director,
trustee or nonlegal advisor of an organization or governmental agency devoted
to the improvement of the law, the legal system or the administration of
justice or of a nonprofit educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, sororal
or civic organization, subject to the following limitations and the other
requirements of this chapter:
COMMENT
This
provision does not apply to a judge's service in a governmental position
unconnected with the improvement of the law, the legal system or the
administration of justice; see par. (b).
See
Comment to SCR 60.05 (2) regarding use of the phrase "subject to the
following limitations and the other requirements of this chapter." As an example of the meaning of the phrase, a
judge permitted by this provision to serve on the board of a fraternal
institution may be prohibited from such service by SCR 60.03 (1) or (3) or
60.05 (1) if the institution practices invidious discrimination or if service
on the board otherwise casts reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act
impartially as a judge.
Service
by a judge on behalf of a civic or charitable organization may be governed by
other provisions of SCR 60.05 in addition to sub. (3). For example, a judge is prohibited by sub.
(7) from serving as a legal advisor to a civic or charitable organization.
1. A judge may not serve as an officer,
director, trustee or nonlegal advisor if it is likely that the organization
will do any of the following:
a. Engage in proceedings that would ordinarily
come before the judge.
b. Engage frequently in adversary proceedings in
the court of which the judge is a member or in any court subject to the
appellate jurisdiction of the court of which the judge is a member.
COMMENT
The
changing nature of some organizations and of their relationship to the law
makes it necessary for a judge to regularly re-examine the activities of each
organization with which the judge is affiliated to determine if it is proper
for the judge to continue the affiliation.
For example, in many jurisdictions charitable hospitals are now more
frequently in court than in the past.
Similarly, the boards of some legal aid organizations now make policy
decisions that may have political significance or imply commitment to causes
that may come before the courts for adjudication.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), par. (c) 1.b. does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
2. A judge, in any capacity:
a. May assist the organization in planning
fund-raising activities and may participate in the management and investment of
the organization's funds but may not personally participate in the solicitation
of funds or other fund-raising activities, except that a judge may solicit
funds from other judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or
appellate authority;
COMMENT
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), par. (c) 2.a. does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
b. May make recommendations to public and
private fund-granting organizations on projects and programs concerning the
law, the legal system or the administration of justice;
c. May not personally participate in membership
solicitation if the solicitation reasonably may be perceived as coercive or,
except as permitted in subd. 2.a, if the membership solicitation is essentially
a fund-raising mechanism; and
COMMENT
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), par. (c) 2.c. does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
d. May not use or permit the use of the prestige
of judicial office for fund raising or membership solicitation.
COMMENT
A
judge may solicit membership or endorse or encourage membership efforts for an
organization devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system or the
administration of justice or a nonprofit educational, religious, charitable,
fraternal or civic organization as long as the solicitation cannot reasonably
be perceived as coercive and is not essentially a fund-raising mechanism. Solicitation of funds for an organization and
solicitation of memberships similarly involve the danger that the person
solicited will feel obligated to respond favorably to the solicitor if the
solicitor is in a position of influence or control. A judge must not engage in direct, individual
solicitation of funds or memberships in person, in writing or by telephone
except in the following cases: 1) a
judge may solicit for funds or memberships other judges over whom the judge
does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority, 2) a judge may solicit
other persons for membership in the organizations described above if neither
those persons nor persons with whom they are affiliated are likely ever to
appear before the court on which the judge serves, and 3) a judge who is an
officer of such an organization may send a general membership solicitation
mailing over the judge's signature.
SCR
60.05 should not be read as proscribing participation in de minimis
fund-raising activities so long as a judge is careful to avoid using the
prestige of the office in the activity.
Thus, e.g., a judge may pass the collection basket during services at
church, may ask friends and neighbors to buy tickets to a pancake breakfast for
a local neighborhood center and may cook the pancakes at the event but may not
personally ask attorneys and others who are likely to appear before the judge
to buy tickets to it. Similarly, SCR
60.05 should not be read to prohibit judges from soliciting memberships for
religious purposes, but judges must nevertheless avoid using the prestige of
the office for the purpose of such solicitation.
Use
of an organization letterhead for fund raising or membership solicitation does
not violate subd. 2 provided the letterhead lists only the judge's name and
office or other position in the organization and, if comparable designations
are listed for other persons, the judge's judicial designation. In addition, a judge must make reasonable
efforts to ensure that the judge's staff, court officials and others subject to
the judge's direction and control do not solicit funds on the judge's behalf
for any purpose, charitable or otherwise.
A
judge may be a speaker or guest of honor at an organization's fund-raising
event provided there is no advertising of the judge as speaker or guest of
honor in order to encourage people to attend and make contributions and
provided that any contributions at the event are made prior to the judge's
speech or presentation as guest of honor.
A judge's attendance at such event is permissible if otherwise
consistent with this chapter.
(4) Financial Activities.
(a) 1. A
judge may not engage in financial or business dealings that could meet any of
the following conditions:
a. Reasonably be perceived to exploit the
judge's judicial position.
b. Involve the judge in frequent transactions or
continuing business relationships with those lawyers or other persons likely to
come before the court on which the judge serves.
COMMENT
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (4)(a)1.b. does not apply to a judge serving on
a part-time basis.
2. A judge shall comply with sub. (4)(a)1 as
soon as reasonably possible and, in any event, within one year of the
applicability of this chapter to the judge.
COMMENT
When
a judge acquires in a judicial capacity information, such as material contained
in filings with the court, that is not yet generally known, the judge must not
use the information for private gain. See
SCR 60.03 (2) and 60.04 (1) (m).
A
judge must avoid financial and business dealings that involve the judge in
frequent transactions or continuing business relationships with persons likely
to come either before the judge personally or before other judges on the
judge's court. In addition, a judge
should discourage members of the judge's family from engaging in dealings that
would reasonably appear to exploit the judge's judicial position. This rule is necessary to avoid creating an
appearance of exploitation of office or favoritism and to minimize the
potential for recusal or disqualification.
With respect to affiliation of relatives of a judge with law firms
appearing before the judge, see Comment to SCR 60.04 (4) relating to
recusal.
Participation
by a judge in financial and business dealings is subject to the general
prohibitions in SCR 60.05 (1) against activities that tend to reflect adversely
on impartiality, demean the judicial office, or interfere with the proper
performance of judicial duties. Such
participation is also subject to the general prohibition in SCR 60.03 against
activities involving impropriety or the appearance of impropriety and the
prohibition in SCR 60.03 (2) against the misuse of the prestige of judicial
office. In addition, a judge must maintain
high standards of conduct in all of the judge's activities, as set forth in SCR
60.02. See Comment to SCR 60.05
(2) regarding use of the phrase "subject to the requirements of this
chapter."
If
engaged in a financial or business activity at the time this chapter becomes
applicable to the judge, a judge may continue to do so for a reasonable period
not to exceed one year.
(b) A judge may, subject to the requirements of
this chapter, hold and manage investments of the judge and members of the
judge's family, including real estate, and engage in other remunerative
activity.
COMMENT
Subject
to the requirements of this chapter, a judge may hold and manage investments
owned solely by the judge, investments owned solely by a member or members of
the judge's family, and investments owned jointly by the judge and members of
the judge's family.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (4)(b) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(c) 1. Except as provided in par. 2, a judge may
serve as an officer, director, manager, general partner, advisor or employee of
a business entity if that service does not conflict with the judge's judicial
duties, create the appearance of impropriety, or otherwise violate any
provision of this chapter.
2. A judge may not serve as an officer,
director, manager, general partner, advisor or employee of any business entity
affected with a public interest, including a financial institution, insurance
company, and public utility, and may not participate in or permit the judge's
name to be used in connection with any business venture or commercial
advertising that indicates the judge's title or affiliation with the judiciary
or otherwise lends the power or prestige of office to promote a business or
commercial venture.
COMMENT
A
judge may participate in a business not affected with a public interest if that
participation does not conflict with the judge's judicial duties, create the
appearance of impropriety, or violate any other provision of this Code. For example, a judge may be prohibited from
participation if the business entity frequently appears before a court in the
jurisdiction in which the judge serves or the participation requires
significant time away from judicial duties.
Similarly, a judge must avoid participation if the judge's participation
would involve misuse of the prestige of office.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (4)(c) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(d) A judge shall manage the judge's investments
and other financial interests so as to minimize the number of cases in which
the judge's recusal or disqualification is required. As soon as the judge can do so without
serious financial detriment, the judge shall divest himself or herself of
investments and other financial interests that might require frequent
disqualification.
COMMENT
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (4)(d) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(e) A judge may not accept, and shall urge
members of the judge's family residing in the judge's household not to accept,
a gift, favor or loan from anyone except for the following:
COMMENT
Sub.
(4) (e) does not apply to contributions to a judge's campaign for judicial
office.
Because
a gift, favor or loan to a member of the judge's family residing in the judge's
household might be viewed as intended to influence the judge, a judge must
inform those family members of the relevant ethical constraints upon the judge
in this regard and discourage those family members from violating them. A judge cannot, however, reasonably be
expected to know or control all of the financial or business activities of all
family members residing in the judge's household.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (4)(e) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
1. A gift incident to a public testimonial,
books, tapes and other resource materials supplied by publishers on a
complimentary basis for official use, or an invitation to the judge and the
judge's spouse or guest to attend a bar-related function or an activity devoted
to the improvement of the law, the legal system or the administration of
justice.
COMMENT
Acceptance
of an invitation to a law-related function is governed by sub. (4) (e) 1;
acceptance of an invitation paid for by an individual lawyer or group of
lawyers is governed by sub. (4) (e) 10.
A
judge may accept a public testimonial or a gift incident thereto only if the
donor organization is not an organization whose members comprise or frequently
represent the same side in litigation, and the testimonial and gift are
otherwise in compliance with other provisions of this chapter. See SCR 60.05 (1) (a) and 60.03
(2).
2. A gift, award or benefit incident to the
business, profession or other separate activity of a spouse or other family
member of a judge residing in the judge's household, including gifts, awards
and benefits for the use of both the spouse or other family member and the
judge, provided the gift, award or benefit could not reasonably be perceived as
intended to influence the judge in the performance of judicial duties.
3. Ordinary social hospitality.
4. A gift from a relative.
5. A gift from a friend for a special occasion,
such as a wedding, anniversary or birthday, if the gift is fairly commensurate
with the occasion and the relationship.
COMMENT
A
gift to a judge, or to a member of the judge's family living in the judge's
household, that is excessive in value raises questions about the judge's
impartiality and the integrity of the judicial office and might require recusal
or disqualification of the judge where recusal or disqualification would not
otherwise be required. See,
however, par. (e) 5.
6. Anything of value if the activity or occasion
for which it is given is unrelated to the judge's use of the state's time,
facilities, services or supplies not generally available to all citizens of
this state and the judge can show by clear and convincing evidence that it was
unrelated to and did not arise from the judge's holding or having held a public
office.
7. A gift, favor or loan from a relative or
close personal friend whose appearance or interest in a case would in any event
require recusal under SCR 60.04(4).
8. A loan from a lending institution in its
regular course of business on the same terms generally available to persons who
are not judges.
9. A scholarship or fellowship awarded on the same
terms and based on the same criteria applied to other applicants.
10. Any other gift, favor or loan, only if the
donor is not a party or other person who has come or is likely to come or whose
interests have come or are likely to come before the judge.
COMMENT
Unless
authorized by other provisions of sub. (4) (e), sub. (4)(e) 10 prohibits judges
from accepting gifts, favors or loans from lawyers or their firms if they have
come or are likely to come before the judge; it also prohibits gifts, favors or
loans from clients of lawyers or their firms when the clients' interests have
come or are likely to come before the judge.
See sec. 19.43 et seq., Stats.
(5) Fiduciary Activities.
(a) A judge may not serve as executor,
administrator or other personal representative, trustee, guardian,
attorney-in-fact or other fiduciary, except for the estate, trust or person of
a member of the judge's family, and then only if such service will not
interfere with the proper performance of his or her judicial duties.
(b) A judge may not serve as a fiduciary if it is
likely that the judge as a fiduciary will be engaged in proceedings that would
ordinarily come before the judge or if the estate, trust or ward becomes
involved in adversary proceedings in the court on which the judge serves or one
under its appellate jurisdiction.
(c) The same restrictions on financial activities
that apply to a judge personally also apply to the judge while acting in a
fiduciary capacity.
(d) A judge shall comply with pars. (a) and (b)
as soon as reasonably possible and, in any event, within one year of the
applicability of this chapter to the judge.
COMMENT
A
judge who is a fiduciary at the time this chapter becomes effective for the
estate or person of one who is not a member of the judge's family may continue
to act as such if the demands on his or her time and the possibility of a
conflict of interest are not substantial and for the period of time necessary
to avoid serious adverse consequences to the beneficiary of the fiduciary
relationship but in no event longer than one year.
The
restrictions imposed by SCR 60.05 may conflict with the judge's obligation as a
fiduciary. For example, a judge should
resign as trustee if detriment to the trust would result from divestiture of
holdings the retention of which would place the judge in violation of sub. (4)
(d).
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (5) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(6) Service as Arbitrator or Mediator. A judge may not act as an arbitrator or
mediator or otherwise perform judicial functions in a private capacity unless
expressly authorized by law.
COMMENT
Paragraph
(6) does not prohibit a judge from participating in arbitration, mediation or
settlement conference performed as part of judicial duties.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (6) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(7) Practice of Law. A judge may not practice law. Notwithstanding this prohibition, a judge may
act pro se and may, without compensation, give legal advice to
and draft or review documents for a member of the judge's family and represent
without compensation the estate of a person with whom the judge maintains a
close familial relationship so long as the estate remains uncontested.
COMMENT
This
prohibition refers to the practice of law in a representative capacity and not
in a pro se capacity. A
judge may act for himself or herself in all legal matters, including matters
involving litigation and matters involving appearances before or other dealings
with legislative and other governmental bodies.
However, in so doing, a judge must not abuse the prestige of office to
advance the interests of the judge or judge's family. See SCR 60.03 (2).
The
chapter allows a judge to give legal advice to and draft legal documents for
members of the judge's family, so long as the judge receives no
compensation. A judge must not, however,
act as an advocate for a member of the judge's family in a legal matter.
The
restraint against a judge giving advice to parties in matters before the judge
does not prohibit a judge from advising such parties to obtain lawyers or
medical treatment and from advising such parties on similar matters unrelated
to the merits of the matter before the judge.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (7) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis.
(8) Compensation, Reimbursement and
Reporting.
(a) Compensation and Reimbursement. A judge may receive compensation and
reimbursement of expenses for the extra-judicial activities permitted by this
chapter if the source of such payments does not give the appearance of
influencing the judge's performance of judicial duties or otherwise give the
appearance of impropriety.
1. Compensation may not exceed a reasonable
amount nor may the compensation exceed what a person who is not a judge would
receive for the same activity.
2. Expense reimbursement shall be 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 guest. Any payment in excess of that amount is compensation.
(b) Financial reports. Except as provided in SCR 60.07, a judge
shall file with the ethics board a timely financial report as required by
section 19.43 of the statutes. The
report shall also be filed by commissioners of the supreme court, staff
attorneys of the court of appeals, and the director of state courts.
COMMENT
The
chapter does not prohibit a judge from accepting honoraria or speaking fees
provided that the compensation is reasonable and commensurate with the task
performed. A judge should ensure,
however, that no conflicts are created by the arrangement. A judge must not appear to trade on the
judicial position for personal advantage.
Nor should a judge spend significant time away from court duties to meet
speaking or writing commitments for compensation. In addition, the source of the payment must
not raise any question of undue influence or the judge's ability or willingness
to be impartial.
See
SCR 60.05 (4) (e) and sec. 19.56, Stats., regarding reporting of gifts and
loans.
As
provided in SCR 60.07(2), sub. (8) does not apply to a judge serving on a
part-time basis. Sub. (8) does not apply
to a supplemental court commissioner authorized under SCR 75.02(3) who has
performed fewer than 40 hours of circuit court commissioner duties in the
preceding calendar year.
SCR
60.06 A judge or judicial candidate
shall refrain from inappropriate
political activity.
(1g) Terminology.
In this section, “judge” has the meaning given in SCR 60.01(8), except
that in subs. (1m), (2), and (4), “judge” does not include a court commissioner
or a municipal judge who did not devote 40 or more hours to the performance of
his or her official duties in the preceding calendar year.
(1m) Candidate for Office. A judge shall not become a candidate for
a federal, state, or local nonjudicial elective office without first resigning
his or her judgeship. A judge’s
eligibility to serve may be governed by other rules or constitutional
provisions.
COMMENT
Article
VII, section 10 (1) of the Wisconsin Constitution provides, “No justice of the
supreme court or judge of any court of record shall hold any other office of
public trust, except a judicial office, during the term for which
elected.” See Wagner v.
Milwaukee County Election Comm’n, 2003 WI 103, 263 Wis. 2d 709, 666 N.W.2d
816.
(2) Party
membership and activities.
(a) Individuals who seek election or appointment to the
judiciary may have aligned themselves with a particular political party and may have engaged in partisan political activities. Wisconsin adheres to the concept of a nonpartisian judiciary. A candidate for judicial office shall not appeal to partisanship and shall avoid partisan activity in the spirit of a nonpartisan judiciary.
(b) No judge or candidate for judicial office or judge-elect may
do any of the following:
1. Be a member of any political party.
2. Participate in the affairs, caucuses, promotions,
platforms, endorsements, conventions, or activities of a political party or of
a candidate for partisan office.
3. Make or solicit financial or other contributions in
support of a political party's causes or candidates.
4. Publicly endorse or speak on behalf of its candidates or
platforms.
(c) A partisan political office holder who is seeking
election or appointment to judicial office or who is a judge-elect may continue
to engage in partisan political activities required by his or her present
position.
(d) 1. Paragraph (b) does not prohibit a judge,
candidate for judicial office or judge-elect from attending, as a member of the
public, a public event sponsored by a political party or candidate for partisan
office, or by the campaign committee for such a candidate.
2. If attendance at an event described in subd. 1. requires the purchase of a ticket or otherwise requires the payment of money, the amount paid by the judge, candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect shall not exceed an amount necessary to defray the sponsor's cost of the event reasonably allocable to the judge's, candidate's, or judge-elect's attendance.
(e) Nothing in this subsection
shall be deemed to prohibit a judge, judge-elect, or candidate for judicial
office, whether standing for election or seeking an appointment, from appearing
at partisan political gatherings to promote his or her own candidacy.
COMMENT
The rule prohibits political party membership and activities by judges, nonincumbent candidates for judicial office,
and judges-elect. When one becomes a candidate for judicial office is
determined by the terms of SCR 60.01 (2) which defines
"candidate" as "a person seeking selection for or retention of a
judicial office by means of election or appointment who makes a public
announcement of candidacy, declares or files as a candidate with the election
or appointment authority, or authorizes solicitation or acceptance of
contributions." The rule prohibits judicial candidates and judges-elect as
well as judges from making or soliciting contributions to the party or its
candidates and from publicly endorsing or speaking on behalf of partisan candidates
or platforms. Although the rule contemplates the continuance of nonpartisanship
on the part of Wisconsin judges and those seeking judicial office, judges are
not expected to lead lives of seclusion. As members of the public and as public
officeholders, judges may attend public events, even those sponsored by
political parties or candidates, so long as the attendance does not constitute
the kind of partisan activity prohibited by this rule. The judge, judicial
candidate or judge-elect is responsible for so conducting herself or himself
that her or his presence at the sponsored event is not made to appear as an
endorsement or other prohibited political activity. The judge, judicial
candidate, or judge-elect should also exercise care that the price of his or
her ticket to any such event does not include a prohibited political
contribution.
(3) Campaign Conduct and Rhetoric.
(a) In General. While holding the office of judge
or while a candidate for judicial office or a judge-elect, every judge,
candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect should maintain, in campaign
conduct, the dignity appropriate to judicial office and the integrity and
independence of the judiciary. A judge, candidate for judicial office, or
judge-elect should not manifest bias or prejudice inappropriate to the judicial
office. Every judge, candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect should
always bear in mind the need for scrupulous adherence to the rules of fair play
while engaged in a campaign for judicial office.
COMMENT
This
subsection is new. It states a rule generally applicable to judges, candidates
for judicial office, and judges-elect
(b) Promises and commitments. A judge,
judge-elect, or candidate for judicial office shall not make or permit or
authorize others to make on his or her behalf, with respect to cases,
controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court, pledges,
promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial performance
of the adjudicative duties of the office.
This section prohibits a candidate for judicial office from making
statements that commit the candidate regarding cases, controversies or issues
likely to come before the court. A judge or candidate for judicial office may
not, while a proceeding is pending or impending in the court to which selection
is sought, make any public comment that may reasonably be viewed as committing
the judge, judge-elect or candidate to a particular case outcome. As a
corollary, a candidate should emphasize in any public statement the candidate's
duty to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal views. This section
does not prohibit a candidate from making pledges or promises respecting
improvements in court administration. Nor does this section prohibit an
incumbent judge from making private statements to other judges or court
personnel in the performance of judicial duties. This section applies to any
statement made in the process of securing judicial office, such as statements
to commissions charged with judicial selection.
(c) Misrepresentations. A
candidate for a judicial office shall not knowingly or with reckless disregard
for the statement's truth or falsity misrepresent the identity, qualifications,
present position, or other fact concerning the candidate or an opponent. A
candidate for judicial office should not knowingly make representations that,
although true, are misleading, or knowingly make statements that are likely to
confuse the public with respect to the proper role of judges and lawyers in the
American adversary system.
COMMENT
This subsection is new. The first sentence is based on the August
2003 amendments to the ABA model code of conduct.
The second sentence is aspirational. Thus, "should" is used
rather than "shall." The remaining standards are mandatory and
prohibit candidates from knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth
making various specific types of misrepresentations. Candidates are not responsible
for misrepresentations or misleading statements made by third parties not
subject to the control of the candidate, e.g., through independent expenditures
by interest groups.
(4) Solicitation and Acceptance of Campaign Contributions. A
judge, candidate for judicial office, or judge-elect shall not personally
solicit or accept campaign contributions. A candidate may, however, establish a
committee to solicit and accept lawful campaign contributions. The committee is
not prohibited from soliciting and accepting lawful campaign contributions from
lawyers. A judge or candidate for judicial office or judge-elect may serve on
the committee but should avoid direct involvement with the committee's
fundraising efforts. A judge or candidate for judicial office or judge-elect may
appear at his or her own fundraising events. When the committee solicits or
accepts a contribution, a judge or candidate for judicial office should also be
mindful of the requirements of SCR 60.03 and 60.04(4).
A judge should avoid having his or her name listed on another's
fundraising solicitation even when the listing is accompanied with a disclaimer
that the name is not listed for fundraising purposes.
Acknowledgement
by a judge or candidate for judicial office of a contribution in a courtesy
thank you letter is not prohibited.
(5) Solicitation and Acceptance
of Endorsements. A judge
or
candidate for judicial office may solicit or accept endorsements supporting his
or her election or appointment personally or through his or her committee. A
judge, candidate for judicial office, or his or her committee is not prohibited
from soliciting and accepting endorsements from lawyers and others. A judge or
candidate for judicial office shall not knowingly personally solicit or accept
endorsements from parties who have a case pending before the court to which
election or appointment is sought. Nevertheless, a judge or judicial candidate
may personally solicit or accept endorsements from the types of organizations
that ordinarily make recommendations for selection to the office. In soliciting
or accepting an endorsement, a judge or candidate for judicial office should be
mindful of the requirements of SCR 60.03 and 60.04 (4).
This subsection is new. In light of
the restrictions on campaign rhetoric under SCR 60.06 (3), the receiving
of endorsements is an important method of informing the electorate of
broad-based and presumably informed support for a particular candidacy. Knowing
solicitation and acceptance of endorsements from current litigants are
prohibited. Candidates for judicial office may solicit and accept endorsements
from entities that regularly endorse candidates, such as newspapers and trade
organizations. Neither culling nor cross-checking of names on mailing lists or
dockets is required.
60.07 Applicability.
(1) General. Subject to sub. (2), all judges shall
comply with this chapter. Candidates for judicial office and judges-elect shall
comply with SCR 60.06.
(2) Part-time Judicial Service. A judge who serves
on a part-time basis, including a reserve judge, a part-time municipal judge or
a part-time court commissioner, is not required to comply with the following:
SCR 60.05 (3) (a), (b) and (c) 1b., 2.a, and c.,
(4) (a) 1.b., (b) (c), (d) and (e), (5), (6), (7) and (8). All
circuit court commissioners appointed under SCR 75.02 (1) and those
supplemental court commissioners authorized under SCR 75.02 (3) who have
performed 40 hours or more of circuit court commissioner duties during the
preceding calendar year shall comply with SCR 60.05 (8).
Candidates
for judicial office and judges-elect are subject to the requirements of SCR
60.06.
Amended
January 16, 1985; April 29, 1985; May 11, 1994; November 17, 1994; July 1,
1996; December 20, 1996; April 6, 2001; November 14, 2001; October 29, 2004;
January 1, 2007.
SCR
CHAPTER 60
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
APPENDIX
A. Rules of the Judicial Conduct Advisory
Committee
(1) Membership. A judicial conduct advisory committee
consisting of nine members appointed by the supreme court is created. Six members of the committee shall be
selected from the judiciary of this state, one member shall be selected from
the court commissioners serving the circuit court, one member shall be selected
from attorneys licensed to practice law in this state, and one member shall be
selected from the public. One judge
member shall be a chief judge of a judicial administrative district, one judge
member shall be a judge of the court of appeals, one judge member shall be a
circuit judge or a reserve judge who serves regularly on an urban area court,
one judge member shall be a circuit judge or a reserve judge who serves
regularly on a rural area court, one judge member shall be a municipal judge,
and one judge member shall be a reserve judge.
Members shall serve for a term of three years and shall continue to
serve until a successor is appointed, except that, to achieve staggered terms,
three of the members first appointed, shall serve for one year, three members
for two years, and three members for three years. A member may serve not more than two
successive three-year terms. Appointments
to fill a vacancy shall be for the balance of the term vacated. Members of the committee shall serve without
compensation but shall be reimbursed for expenses actually and necessarily
incurred in the performance of their duties.
(2) Duties. The committee shall do the following:
(a) Render formal advisory opinions and give
informal advice concerning the compliance of contemplated or proposed future
conduct with the code of judicial conduct, provided that an opinion or advice
shall not be rendered on a matter known to be the subject of a past or pending
litigation, disciplinary proceeding, or investigation.
(b) Make recommendations to the supreme court for
amendment to the code of judicial conduct or the rules governing the committee.
(c) Each year submit to the supreme court a report
of its activities.
(3) Administration. The committee shall be administered under the
direction of a chair appointed by the supreme court. The chair shall serve for a term of one year
and may serve not more than two successive terms. Staff of the director of state courts office
shall be available to answer inquiries concerning committee procedures, to
receive and process request for a formal advisory opinion, to maintain
committee records, and to provide other staff assistance as appropriate.
(4) Requests for opinion or advice. Formal advisory opinions and informal advice
may be requested by a judge or a candidate for judicial office about his or her
own contemplated or proposed future conduct.
A request for a formal advisory opinion shall be submitted in writing
and include a detailed statement of all relevant facts and circumstances, a
discussion of the issues presented in the request, and references to the
relevant provisions of the code of judicial conduct, advisory opinions, case
law, and other authority the requestor has consulted in the matter. A request for informal advice may be made
orally or in writing to any member of the committee. The identity, organizational affiliation, and
geographic location of a person requesting a formal advisory opinion or
informal advice shall be confidential.
(5) Consideration of requests. The committee shall determine whether a
request for a formal advisory opinion should be resolved with a written,
published opinion or by letter or other communication. A formal advisory opinion shall be decided by
a majority vote of the committee. The
committee may confer in person, by correspondence or by telephone or other
electronic means as needed to conduct committee business and consider requests
for formal advisory opinions. The
committee shall maintain records of its determinations and formal advisory
opinions.
(6) Formal advisory opinion. Formal advisory opinions shall be edited to
omit the names of persons, courts, places and any other information that may tend
to identify the requestor or any other person.
Before issuing a formal advisory opinion, the committee shall provide a
copy of the opinion to the requestor, and the requestor may ask the committee
to omit from its specified information that may tend to identify the requestor
or any other person. In the event
necessary editing produces an opinion that the committee determines is not
meaningful, the committee may determine that a formal advisory opinion not be
published and distribute it only to the requestor.
(7) Opinion distribution. Except as provided in sub. (6), a formal
advisory opinion shall be distributed to the requestor, the justices and clerk
of the supreme court, the chief judge of the court of appeals, the chief judges
of the judicial administrative districts in this state, the director of state
courts, the state law library, and the state bar of Wisconsin. Formal advisory opinions shall be accumulated
and distributed to all judges at least annually by the office of the director
of state courts.
(8) Reconsideration. Within 30 days after the distribution of a formal advisory opinion
to all judges, a person authorized to request an opinion may ask the committee
to reconsider the formal advisory opinion by submitting a written request for
reconsideration explaining the basis for the request. The committee shall respond to the request by
reaffirming or revising the formal advisory opinion or by denying the
request. The committee may, on its own
motion, reconsider a formal advisory opinion at any time. A revised formal advisory opinion shall be
distributed as provided in sub. (7).
(9) Effect of opinion or advice. (a) A
formal advisory opinion shall not be binding upon the Wisconsin judicial
commission or the supreme court in the exercise of their judicial discipline
responsibilities. The fact that a judge
or candidate for judicial office has requested and relied upon a formal
advisory opinion should be taken into account by the Wisconsin judicial commission
in its disposition of complaints and in determining whether to file a formal
complaint with the supreme court. If a
judge or candidate for judicial office has requested and received a formal
advisory opinion, compliance of the judge or the candidate for judicial office
with that opinion shall constitute evidence of a good faith effort to comply
with the code of judicial conduct in a judicial disciplinary proceeding based,
in whole or in part, on the conduct for which the opinion was requested.
(b) Reliance of a judge or candidate for judicial
office on informal advice given by the committee or by any of its members may
not constitute evidence of a good faith effort to comply with the code of
judicial conduct.
(10) Confidentiality. With the exception of published formal
advisory opinions, all opinions, inquiries, replies, circulated drafts,
records, documents, files, communications with staff, and proceedings of the
committee shall be confidential.
Confidentiality does not apply if the person requesting the formal
advisory opinion or informal advice expressly waives confidentiality in writing
or relies on the opinion or advice in a judicial disciplinary proceeding. Notwithstanding any waiver, committee
deliberations shall be confidential.
(11) Immunity.
Members of the committee shall be immune from liability for any
conduct relating directly or indirectly to their duties for the committee. When acting in their advisory capacity, the
judge members of the committee shall be exempt from the provisions regarding
disciplinary responsibilities in the code of judicial conduct and the attorney
members of the committee shall be exempt from the provisions regarding
reporting misconduct in the rules of professional conduct for attorneys.
B. Procedures of the Judicial Conduct Advisory
Committee
(1) Request for formal advisory opinions. A request for a formal advisory opinion shall
be in writing and shall be addressed to the chair of the committee. The requestor shall also send a copy of the
request to the director of state courts.
The request shall include a detailed statement of all relevant facts and
circumstances, a discussion of the issues presented in the request, and
references to the relevant provisions of the code of judicial conduct, advisory
opinions, case law, and other authority the requestor has consulted in the
matter. The identity, organizational
affiliation, and geographic location of a person requesting a formal advisory
opinion shall be confidential.
(2) Consideration of Request. (a)
The chair of the committee shall assign requests for formal advisory
opinions in rotation to committee members for research and preparation of
preliminary recommendations and draft opinions.
If the information provided in the request is insufficient in detail to
enable the committee to render a formal advisory opinion, the committee shall
request supplemental information from the requestor to enable it to render a
formal advisory opinion. If the
requested supplemental information is insufficient or is not provided within 10
days of the request, the committee shall so state in a letter to the requestor
and shall not render a formal advisory opinion.
(b) Within 30 days after receipt of the
assignment of the request or receipt of sufficient supplemental information, if
requested, the member to whom the request is assigned shall circulate to all
committee members a preliminary recommendation and draft opinion. Prior to circulation of a preliminary
recommendation and draft opinion, the member to whom the request is assigned
may consult with other committee members.
(c)
Within 15 days after receipt of the preliminary recommendation and draft
opinion, committee members shall circulate to all other committee members any
comments on the recommendation and opinion. Within the same 15-day period any
committee member may also request that a discussion of the preliminary
recommendation and draft opinion be held.
If a majority of the committee determines that a discussion is needed,
the committee shall have a discussion of the matter within 30 days after the
committee determined a discussion was needed.
(d) The committee may consider requests for
formal advisory opinions and opinion drafts in person, by telephone, by
facsimile transmission, by mail, or by any other electronic means.
(e)
1. Within 20 days of whichever of the
following dates is applicable, the committee member to whom the request has
been assigned shall circulate a final draft opinion to the committee members:
a. If no request for discussion is made or if a
request is not agreed to by the committee, the last day for comment on the
preliminary recommendation and draft opinion under par. (c).
b. If a request for discussion is agreed to by
the committee, the date of discussion on the matter under par. (c).
2. Formal advisory opinions shall be decided by
a majority vote of the committee within 10 days after circulation of the final
draft opinion.
(f) Where appropriate, the committee may respond
to a request for a formal advisory opinion by referring the requestor to a
prior formal advisory opinion and by so doing need not issue a new formal
advisory opinion.
(3) Form of Opinion. Prior to issuance, a formal advisory opinion
shall be edited to omit the names of persons, courts, places and any other
information that may tend to identify the requestor or any other person. The committee shall provide a copy of the
proposed opinion to the requestor, and within 10 days of receipt, the requestor
may ask that specified information be omitted from it that may tend to identify
the requestor or any other person. A
formal advisory opinion shall include a statement that it does not purport to
address the provisions of the Code of Ethics for Public Officials and
Employees, subchapter III of ch. 19 of the statutes.
(4) Issuance and Distribution of Formal
Advisory Opinion. Upon
approval of a majority of the committee, a formal advisory opinion shall issue
in written form sent to the director of state courts office. The director of state courts office shall
send a copy of the formal advisory opinion to the requestor, the justices and
the clerk of the supreme court, the chief judge of the court of appeals, the
chief judges of the judicial administrative districts, the state law library
and the State Bar of Wisconsin. The
director of state courts office shall retain a copy of each formal advisory
opinion and accumulate and distribute at least annually to all judges a copy of
each formal advisory opinion issued by the committee. The director of state courts office shall maintain
the records of the committee's determinations and formal advisory opinions.
(5) Reconsideration. (a)
Within 15 days after receipt of a formal advisory opinion, the requestor
may request in writing to the committee that it reconsider the opinion,
explaining the basis for that request.
Within 10 days after receipt of a request for reconsideration from the
requestor, the committee shall respond by granting the request and approving or
revising the opinion or by denying the request.
Upon granting a request for reconsideration, the committee shall
consider the matter as set forth in sec. (2).
(b) Within 30 days after distribution of a formal
advisory opinion to all judges, a person authorized to request an opinion may
request in writing to the committee that it reconsider the opinion, explaining
the basis for that request. The
committee shall respond as set forth in sub. (a).
(c) The committee may, on its own motion,
reconsider a formal advisory opinion at any time.
(d) A revised formal advisory opinion shall be
issued and distributed as provided in sec. (4).
(6) Requests for Informal Advice. Requests for informal advice on the
interpretation and application of the code of judicial conduct to specific
factual situations may be submitted in writing to the chair of the committee or
communicated in person or by telephone to any member of the committee. Any member of the committee may respond to
the request for informal advice.
Reliance on informal advice may not constitute evidence of a good faith
effort to comply with the code of judicial conduct.
Adopted
March 7, 1997; Amended June 18, 1997; September 25, 2000; April 26, 2001;
January 23, 2002,.