the Florida Bar--Code of Judicial Conduct, In re
| Decision Date | 25 July 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 43707,BAR--CODE,43707 |
| Parties | In re THE FLORIDAOF JUDICIAL CONDUCT. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
We have for consideration the petition of The Florida Bar seeking the adoption of a Code of Judicial Conduct in lieu of the existing Canons of Judicial Ethics which were adopted by this Court on January 27, 1941, and subsequently amended. By our order of December 21, 1970, 'In Re : Petition of the Committee on Standards of Judicial Conduct, we directed that a special committee submit a report containing its recommendations for the adoption of new canons of judicial ethics in accordance with a more modern and realistic concept of the responsibilities of judicial officers.' This special committee was composed of the following members:
John M. McCarthy, Stephen H. Grimes
Chairman
E. Dixie Beggs, Leon H. Handley
Vice Chairman Sam H. Mann, Jr
Henry Burnett
Joel T. Daves III Hamilton D. Upchurch
Darrey A. Davis John T. Wigginton
L. Robert Frank O. Edgar Williams, Jr
Delbridge L. Gibbs
Board Liaison
--------------
John R. Gould
Their work product has been approved by the County Judges Conference, the Circuit Judges Conference, the District Courts of Appeal Judges Conference and Board of Governors of The Florida Bar. They are to be commended for their exhaustive study and diligent efforts.
The proposed Code requires that many incumbent justices and judges be required to rearrange their financial and business interests. We feel that to require an immediate compliance with the Code, in this respect, would cause great financial hardship and we have, therefore, allowed the incumbent justices and judges a period of two years within which to bring themselves in strict compliance with Canon 5.
Many lawyers have become members of the judiciary at great financial sacrifice. Because of the limitations placed on business activities by the Code of Judicial Conduct and because of the limited salaries and retirement benefits, as well as the uncertainty of judicial tenure under present electoral process, a retired justice or judge who does not desire to accept assignment for judicial service shall be allowed to engage in the practice of law even though he may be drawing retirement benefits. We are of the opinion that this would be an incentive for lawyers of ability to seek judicial office.
The retirement benefits for all justices and judges are prescribed either under the Florida Retirement System (Fla.Stat., Ch. 121, F.S.A.) or the Supreme Court Justices, District Court of Appeal Judges and Circuit Judges Retirement System (Fla.Stat., Ch. 123, F.S.A.). We are aware of the provisions of Fla.Stat. § 123.09, F.S.A., providing as follows:
'No justice of the supreme court, district court of appeal judge or circuit judge shall engage in the practice of law in this state while drawing retirement compensation provided for by any law of this state for judges.'
and Fla.Stat. § 123.20, F.S.A., relating to retirement for disability and providing as follows:
'No justice or judge shall engage in the practice of law in this state while drawing retirement compensation provided for by any law of this state for justices or judges.'
The Florida Retirement System (Fla.Stat., Ch. 121, F.S.A.), does not prohibit a retired justice or judge from engaging in the practice of law. Even under the quoted provisions of Fla.Stat., Ch. 123, F.S.A. (judicial retirement), a justice or judge would be entitled to engage in the practice of law without drawing his retirement. Such a justice or judge could subsequently offer himself for judicial assignment and renew the payment of his retirement benefits. It is apparent that the purpose of the statutes quoted above was to prohibit a retired judge subject to assignment from engaging in the practice of law, as this might create a conflict of interest in the event he served part time on the judiciary. This would be contrary to the philosophy that a practicing attorney should never be a part-time judge. The purpose of the quoted statutes was to regulate the practice of law as well as the conduct of judges. These are matters solely within the province of this Court under the provisions of Fla.Const., art. V, § 15, F.S.A. We therefore hold that Fla.Stat. §§ 123.09 and 123.20, F.S.A., are unconstitutional.
Other retirees under Chapter 121 (Florida Retirement System) are allowed to receive retirement benefits while employed at other occupations. See Fla.Stat., § 121.091, F.S.A. It would be a denial of equal protection to say that all retirees, except justices and judges, may engage in other professions or employment without losing retirement benefits.
The fact that this is not an adversary proceeding does not prohibit the Court from declaring the above statutes unconstitutional. See In Re: Advisory Opinion to the Governor, 63 So.2d 321 (Fla.1953), where this Court in an advisory opinion (a non-adversary proceeding under the Constitution and Rules at that time) declared a statute to be unconstitutional.
The autonomy of the Legislature in the field of retirement is tempered by the vested rights of those employees who have contributed to the fund. A retired justice or judge, who rejects the possibility of assignment to judicial service, may embark on any other career he may choose without sacrificing his vested right to compensation under our retirement laws.
These are the only major additions to the Code of Judicial Conduct as submitted by The Florida Bar, although a few minor changes are made.
We point out that Canon 6 requires the manner and method of filing financial reports. A compliance with Canon 6 supersedes the requirements of any statute relating to financial reporting and it will not be necessary for the justices and judges to file reports under any statute since such reports are filed under Canon 6.
The appended Code of Judicial Conduct is hereby adopted in lieu of the existing Canons of Judicial Ethics and shall govern the conduct of all justices and judges effective September 30, 1973.
SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
THE FLORIDA BAR
Some fifty years ago the American Bar Association formulated the original Canons of Judicial Ethics. Those Canons, occasionally amended, have been adopted in most states, including Florida.
Recognizing that current needs and problems required revisions, the American Bar Association has now adopted and proposed to the states and other jurisdictions, including the federal courts, a Code of Judicial Conduct. In the revision process, the Association sought and considered the views of the Bench and Bar and other interested persons.
This Code, with minor modifications to adapt it to our Florida Judicial System, is adopted by the Supreme Court of Florida to supersede the Canons of Judicial Ethics. The Code, consisting of statements of norms denominated canons, and the accompanying text setting forth specific rules, states the standards that judges should observe, and these are mandatory unless otherwise indicated. The commentary is included for purposes of construction and understanding. Under Section 17A, Article V of the Florida Constitution, the Judicial Qualifications Commission is charged with the responsibility of enforcing these standards.
A JUDGE SHOULD UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY
A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL HIS ACTIVITIES
A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES OF HIS OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY
A JUDGE MAY ENGAGE IN ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE LAW, THE LEGAL SYSTEM, AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
A JUDGE SHOULD REGULATE HIS EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF CONFLICT WITH HIS JUDICIAL DUTIES
A JUDGE SHOULD REGULARLY FILE PUBLIC REPORTS OF COMPENSATION FOR PERSONAL SERVICES RECEIVED FOR QUASI-JUDICIAL AND EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES. IN ADDITION, A JUDGE SHALL FILE AN ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT WITH THE JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION
A JUDGE SHOULD REFRAIN FROM POLITICAL ACTIVITY INAPPROPRIATE TO HIS JUDICIAL OFFICE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF COMPLIANCE
An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and enforcing, and should himself observe, high standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. The provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further that objective.
A. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
B. A judge should not allow his family, social, or other relationships to influence his judicial conduct or judgment. He should not lend the prestige of his office to advance the private interests of others; nor should he convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence him. He should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.
Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. He must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. He must therefore accept restrictions on his conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Attorney General of Maryland v. Waldron
...protection guaranties. The Supreme Court of Florida reached a like result when the matter was before it in In re The Florida Bar Code of Judicial Conduct, 281 So.2d 21 (Fla.1973). In this regard, we find the words of Justice Jackson in his now famous concurrence in Railway Express v. New Yo......
-
State ex rel. Turner v. Earle
...codes of ethics and to modern rules relating to conflicts of interest. The Code of Judicial Conduct, recently adopted by this Court (281 So.2d 21), is a good index to the nature of conduct that is unbecoming of a The rules this court has adopted for the procedural operation of the Commissio......
-
Williams-Yulee v. Fla. Bar
...L.Rev. 1421, 1423–1428 (2012).Amid the corruption scandals of the 1970s, the Florida Supreme Court adopted a new Code of Judicial Conduct. 281 So.2d 21 (1973). In its present form, the first sentence of Canon 1 reads, “An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in ou......
-
Williams-Yulee v. Fla. Bar
...1421, 1423–1428 (2012).Amid the corruption scandals of the 1970s, the Florida Supreme Court adopted a new Code of Judicial Conduct. 281 So.2d 21 (1973). In its present form, the first sentence of Canon 1 reads, "An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our socie......