The New York Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics has issued an opinion stating that a judge is not required to take disciplinary action or recuse themselves from a traffic ticket case under specific circumstances. Opinion 25-155 addresses a scenario where a judge learns that a co-judge declined to consider an improper ex parte communication regarding the ticket and instead reassigned the case.
The inquiry came from a judge whose co-judge was allegedly approached by a former judge to dispose of a traffic ticket ex parte, as the defendant was related to the former judge. The co-judge declined the request and directed court clerks to reassign the matter to the inquiring judge, without attempting to influence the outcome. The inquiring judge has had no direct communication with either the co-judge or the former judge about the matter.
The Committee referenced judicial ethics rules requiring judges to avoid impropriety and promote public confidence in the judiciary. Judges must take appropriate action if they receive information indicating a substantial likelihood that another judge has committed a substantial violation of ethics rules. They must also disqualify themselves from proceedings where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
However, the Committee noted that a judge isn’t required to investigate alleged misconduct and can base disciplinary decisions on existing knowledge. In this case, the inquiring judge lacks knowledge of the former judge’s actions, and the co-judge took immediate steps to avoid impropriety, without trying to influence the case.
Therefore, the Committee concluded that the inquiring judge is not obligated to take disciplinary action against the co-judge or recuse themselves from the case. The judge should adjudicate the matter normally, as there are no grounds to reasonably question their impartiality.
