CJEO Oral Advice Summary No. 2015-012 — Inviting Attorneys to Provide Legal Education to Appellate Justices

1
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT
COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL ETHICS OPINIONS
350 McAllister Street, Room 1144A
San Francisco, CA 94102
(855) 854-5366
www.JudicialEthicsOpinions.ca.gov
CJEO Oral Advice Summary No. 2015-012
[Posted August 24, 2015]
INVITING ATTORNEYS TO PROVIDE LEGAL EDUCATION TO APELLATE
JUSTICES
I. Question:
May appellate attorneys be invited to speak on law-related topics at a legal
education program held for the justices of the appellate district court where the attorneys
practice?
II. Oral Advice Provided:
The California Code of Judicial Ethics1 permits a presiding justice to invite
attorneys to speak on law-related topics at a legal education program held for the justices
of the appellate district court where the attorneys practice, so long as precautions are
1 All further references are to the canons and Advisory Committee commentary in the
California Code of Judicial Ethics.

2
taken to avoid the appearance of impropriety or the diminishment of the public’s
confidence in the impartiality of the court. (Canon 2A(2) [a judge shall act at all times in
a manner that promotes confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary];
Advisory Comm. Commentary foll. Canon 2A(2) [the test for the appearance of
impropriety is whether a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that
the judge would be able to act with integrity, impartiality, and competence]; canon 4B [a
judge may participate in activities concerning legal subject matters, subject to the
requirements of the code]; (Rothman, Cal. Judicial Conduct Handbook (3d ed. 2007) §
6.37, p. 290 (Rothman) [a judge may not participate in an educational program that may
cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially, create the appearance of
political bias or impropriety, or involve comment on pending cases that might
substantially interfere with a fair trial or hearing]; Cal. Judges Assoc. (CJA) Formal
Opinion No. 47 (1997) p. 4 [it is appropriate and desirable for judges to participate
educational programs provided by attorneys so long as the judges’ participation does not
cast reasonable doubt on impartiality or diminish public confidence in the judiciary].)
In the context of an educational luncheon program for appellate justices where a
variety of attorneys who practice before the court are invited to speak about current law-
related topics, the presiding justice is advised to consider and balance the following
precautions to ensure confidence in the impartiality of the court:
 Invite the attorney to discuss legal issues but not specific cases, issues, or
controversies pending in the courts. (Rothman, supra, § 6.37, p. 290, fnt. 161 [any
educational activity must avoid public comment on pending or impending cases];
CJA Op. No. 58 (2006) p. 3 [a judge should never attend an educational program
in which specific matters pending before the court are the subject of discussion].)
 Review the curriculum and content of the attorney’s remarks before the
educational program to ensure that it is not designed to advocate a particular point

3
of view or the merits of the attorney’s cases. (CJA Op. No. 47, supra, p. 3
[discussion of legal issues, ideas, and philosophies is appropriate, however,
discussion of specific pending cases is not appropriate, whether or not the case is
pending before another judge]; CJA Op. No. 58, supra, p. 3 [a judge invited to
attend an educational program should scrutinize the curriculum and content to
ensure that the program is not designed to advocate a particular point of view].)
 Invite attorneys representing opposing positions or parties to speak to the justices
or otherwise be available to hear additional viewpoints. (CJA Op. No. 47, supra,
p. 3 [to offset any perception of partiality, judges participating in educational
events with attorneys representing particular viewpoints are advised to be equally
available to groups representing opposing viewpoints]; CJA Op. No. 58, supra, p.
3 [to dispel any appearance of favoritism, judges should be available to participate
in educational programs involving other groups].)
 Prohibit use of the speaking engagement in the attorney’s advertising or to
otherwise promote the attorney’s practice. (Canon 2B(2) [a judge shall not lend the
prestige of judicial office or use the judicial title in any manner to advance the
interests of others]; CJA Op. No. 47, supra, p. 3 [attorney groups providing
education to judges may not use the judge in its advertising in such a manner as to
make it appear that the judge promotes the goals of the organization].)

This oral advice summary is advisory only (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.80(a), (e); Cal.
Com. Jud. Ethics Opns., Internal Operating Rules & Proc. (CJEO) rule 1(a), (b)). It is based on
facts and issues, or topics of interest, presented to the California Supreme Court Committee on
Judicial Ethics Opinions in a request for an opinion (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.80(i)(3); CJEO
rules 2(f), 6(c)), or on subjects deemed appropriate by the committee (Cal. Rules of Court, rule
9.80(i)(1); CJEO rule 6(a)).