THE COURTS
PART II. CONDUCT STANDARDS
[ 207 PA. CODE CH. 51 ]
Adoption of New Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges; No. 376 Magisterial Rules Doc.
[44 Pa.B. 6205]
[Saturday, October 4, 2014]
Order Per Curiam
And Now, this 18th day of September, 2014, It Is Ordered pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that Rules 1—15 and 23 of the Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges are rescinded effective December 1, 2014, and new Rules are adopted in the following form.
To the extent that notice of proposed rulemaking would otherwise be required by Pa.R.J.A. No. 103, the immediate promulgation of the new Rules is found to be in the interests of justice and efficient administration.
This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and the new Rules shall be effective on December 1, 2014. A person to whom the new Rules become applicable shall comply with all provisions by December 1, 2014, except for Rules 3.4, 3.7, 3.8 and 3.11; such persons shall comply with Rules 3.4, 3.7, 3.8 and 3.11 as soon as reasonably possible and shall do so in any event by December 1, 2015.
Annex A
TITLE 207. JUDICIAL CONDUCT
PART II. CONDUCT STANDARDS
CHAPTER 51. STANDARDS OF CONDUCT OF MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JUDGES (Editor's Note: The current Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges 1—15 which appear in 207 Pa. Code pages 51-1—51-10, serial pages (318355), (318356), (316001)—(316004), (319851), (319852), (355797) and (355798), and Rule 23, codified at 246 Pa. Code Rule 114, pages 100-5 and 100-6, serial pages (348315) and (348316), are replaced with the following Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges 2014.)
Rules 1—15. (Reserved). Rule 23. (Reserved). Canon
1. A magisterial district judge shall uphold and promote the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
2. A magisterial district judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially, competently, and diligently.
3. A magisterial district judge shall conduct the magisterial district judge's personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with the obligations of judicial office.
4. A magisterial district judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary.
Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges 2014 Preamble
(1) These Rules Governing Standards of Conduct (''Conduct Rules'') shall constitute the ''canon of . . . judicial ethics'' referenced in Article V, Section 17(b) of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which states, in pertinent part: ''Justices of the peace (now magisterial district judges) shall be governed by rules or canons which shall be prescribed by the (Pennsylvania) Supreme Court.''
(2) An independent, fair, honorable and impartial judiciary is indispensable to our system of justice. The Pennsylvania legal system is founded upon the principle that an independent, fair, impartial, and competent judiciary, composed of persons of integrity, will interpret and apply the law that governs our society. The judiciary consequently plays a fundamental role in ensuring the principles of justice and the rule of law. The rules contained in these Conduct Rules necessarily require magisterial district judges, individually and collectively, to treat and honor the judicial office as a public trust, striving to preserve and enhance legitimacy and confidence in the legal system.
(3) Magisterial district judges should uphold the dignity of judicial office at all times, avoiding both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in their professional and personal lives. They should at all times conduct themselves in a manner that garners the highest level of public confidence in their independence, fairness, impartiality, integrity, and competence.
(4) The Conduct Rules denote standards for the ethical behavior of magisterial district judges and judicial candidates. It is not an all-encompassing model of appropriate conduct for magisterial district judges and judicial candidates, but rather a complement to general ethical standards and other rules, statutes and laws governing such persons' judicial and personal conduct. The Conduct Rules are designed to assist magisterial district judges in practicing the highest standards of judicial and personal conduct and to establish a basis for disciplinary agencies to regulate magisterial district judges' conduct.
(5) The Conduct Rules are rules of reason that should be applied consistently with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules, and decisional law, and with due regard for all relevant circumstances. The Conduct Rules are to be construed so as not to impinge on the essential independence of magisterial district judges in making judicial decisions.
(6) Where a Rule contains a permissive term, such as ''may'' or ''should,'' the conduct being addressed is committed to the personal and professional discretion of the magisterial district judge or candidate in question, and no disciplinary action should be taken for action or inaction within the bounds of such discretion. Moreover, it is not intended that disciplinary action would be appropriate for every violation of the Conduct Rules' provisions. Whether disciplinary action is appropriate, and the degree of discipline to be imposed, should be determined through a reasonable application of the text and should depend on such factors as the seriousness of the violation, the intent of the magisterial district judge, whether there is a pattern of improper activity, and the effect of the improper activity on others or on the judicial system.
(7) These Conduct Rules are not designed or intended as a basis for civil or criminal liability. Neither are they intended to be the basis for litigants to seek collateral remedies against each other or to obtain tactical advantages in proceedings before a court.
(8) The Ethics Committee of the Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges and the Ethics and Professionalism Committee of the Special Court Judges Association of Pennsylvania are designated as the approved bodies to render advisory opinions regarding ethical concerns involving magisterial district judges and judicial candidates subject to the Conduct Rules. Although such opinions are not, per se, binding upon the Judicial Conduct Board, the Court of Judicial Discipline or the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, action taken in reliance thereon and pursuant thereto shall be taken into account in determining whether discipline should be recommended or imposed. It is anticipated that ethical concerns directed to the Ethics Committee of the Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges would be limited to matters more appropriately before that body, e.g., campaigning for election to the court of common pleas or an appellate court.
(9) In 2014, these Conduct Rules were reformatted and revised in material respects, upon guidance taken from the 2011 edition of the American Bar Association's Model Code of Judicial Conduct, other states' codes, and experience.
Terminology
Aggregate—In relation to contributions for a candidate, includes contributions in cash or kind made directly to a candidate's campaign committee or indirectly with the understanding that they will be used to support the election of a candidate or to oppose the election of the candidate's opponent.
Appropriate authority—The authority having responsibility for initiation of disciplinary process in connection with the violation to be reported.
Contribution—Both financial and in-kind contributions, such as professional or volunteer services, advertising, and other assistance, which if otherwise obtained, would require a financial expenditure.
Domestic partner—A person with whom another person maintains a household and an intimate relationship, other than a person to whom he or she is legally married.
Economic interest—More than a de minimis legal or equitable ownership interest. Except for situations in which the magisterial district judge participates in the management of such a legal or equitable interest, or the interest could be substantially affected by the outcome of a proceeding before a magisterial district judge, it does not include:
(1) an interest in the individual holdings within a mutual or common investment fund;
(2) an interest in securities held by an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization in which the magisterial district judge or the magisterial district judge's spouse, domestic partner, parent, or child serves as a director, an officer, an advisor, or other participant;
(3) a deposit in a financial institution or deposits or proprietary interests the magisterial district judge may maintain as a member of a mutual savings association or credit union, or similar proprietary interests; or
(4) an interest in the issuer of government securities held by the magisterial district judge.
Fiduciary—Includes relationships such as executor, administrator, trustee, or guardian.
Impartial, impartiality, impartially—Absence of bias or prejudice in favor of, or against, particular parties or classes of parties, as well as maintenance of an open mind in considering issues that may come before a magisterial district judge.
Impending matter—A matter that is imminent or expected to occur in the near future.
Impropriety—Includes conduct that violates the law, court rules, or provisions of these Conduct Rules, and conduct that undermines a magisterial district judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality.
Independence—A magisterial district judge's freedom from influence or controls other than those established by law or Rule.
Integrity—Probity, fairness, honesty, uprightness, and soundness of character.
Judicial candidate—Any person, including a sitting magisterial district judge, who is seeking appointment or election to judicial office. A person becomes a candidate for judicial office as soon as he or she makes a public announcement of candidacy, declares or files as a candidate with the appointment or election authority, or where permitted, engages in solicitation or acceptance of contributions or support, or is nominated for appointment or election to office.
Knowingly, knowledge, known, and knows—Actual knowledge of the fact in question. A person's knowledge may be inferred from the circumstances.
Law—Refers to constitutional provisions, statutes, decisional law, Supreme Court Rules and directives, including these Conduct Rules and the Unified Judicial System Policy of Non-Discrimination and Equal Opportunity, and the like which may have an effect upon judicial conduct.
Member of the candidate's family—The spouse, domestic partner, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or other relative or person with whom the candidate maintains a close familial relationship.
Member of the magisterial district judge's family—The spouse, domestic partner, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or other relative or person with whom the magisterial district judge maintains a close familial relationship.
Member of the magisterial district judge's family residing in the magisterial district judge's household—Any relative of a magisterial district judge by blood or marriage, or a person treated by a magisterial district judge as a member of the magisterial district judge's family, who resides in the magisterial district judge's household.
Nonpublic information—Information that is not available to the public. Nonpublic information may include, but is not limited to, information that is sealed by statute or court order or impounded or communicated in camera, and information offered in grand jury proceedings, presentence reports, dependency cases, or psychiatric reports.
Party—A person or entity who has a legal interest in a court proceeding.
Pending matter—A matter that has commenced and continuing on until final disposition.
Personally solicit—A direct request made by a magisterial district judge or a judicial candidate for financial support or in-kind services, whether made by letter, telephone, or any other means of communication.
Political organization—A political party or group sponsored by or affiliated with a political party or candidate, the principal purpose of which is to further the election or appointment of candidates for political office, excluding a judicial candidate's campaign committee created as authorized by these Conduct Rules.
Public election—Includes primary, municipal, and general elections, partisan elections, and nonpartisan elections.
Third degree of relationship—Includes the following persons: great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, uncle, aunt, brother, sister, child, grandchild, great-grandchild, nephew, and niece.
Application
(1) The provisions of these Conduct Rules shall apply to all magisterial district judges as defined in paragraph (2) infra.
(2) A magisterial district judge within the meaning of these Conduct Rules is a magisterial district judge, whether or not a lawyer; a judge of the Philadelphia Municipal Court, Traffic Division; and all senior judges as set forth in (3) infra.1
(3) All senior magisterial district judges, active or eligible for recall to judicial service, shall comply with the provisions of these Conduct Rules; provided however, a senior magisterial judge may accept extra-judicial appointments which are otherwise prohibited by Rule 3.4 (Appointments to Governmental Positions and Other Organizations); and incident to such appointments a senior magisterial district judge is not required to comply with Rule 3.2 (Appearances Before Governmental Bodies and Consultation with Government Officials). However, during the period of such extrajudicial appointment the senior magisterial district judge shall refrain from judicial service.
(4) Canon 4 (governing political and campaign activities) applies to all judicial candidates.
Canon 1. A magisterial district judge shall uphold and promote the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
Rule
1.1. Compliance with the Law. 1.2. Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary. 1.3. Avoiding Abuse of the Prestige of Judicial Office. Rule 1.1. Compliance with the Law.
A magisterial district judge shall comply with the law, including the Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges.
Comment: This Rule concerns a magisterial district judge's duty to comply with the law. For a magisterial district judge's duty to uphold and apply the law in judicial decision-making, see Rule 2.2 and Comment (3) to Rule 2.2.
Rule 1.2. Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary.
A magisterial district judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
Comment: (1) Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by improper conduct and conduct that creates the appearance of impropriety. This principle applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a magisterial district judge.
(2) A magisterial district judge should expect to be the subject of public scrutiny that might be viewed as burdensome if applied to other citizens, and must accept the restrictions imposed by the Conduct Rules.
(3) Conduct that compromises or appears to compromise the independence, integrity, and impartiality of a magisterial district judge undermines public confidence in the judiciary. Because it is not practicable to list all such conduct, the Rule is necessarily cast in general terms.
(4) Magisterial district judges should participate in activities that promote ethical conduct among judges and lawyers, support professionalism within the judiciary and the legal profession, and promote access to justice for all.
(5) ''Impropriety'' is a defined term in the Terminology Section of these Conduct Rules. Actual improprieties include violations of law, court rules or provisions of these Conduct Rules. The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the magisterial district judge violated these Conduct Rules or engaged in other conduct that reflects adversely on the magisterial district judge's honesty, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a magisterial district judge. This test differs from the formerly applied common law test of whether ''a significant minority of the lay community could reasonably question the court's impartiality.''
(6) Magisterial district judges are encouraged to initiate and participate in community outreach activities for the purpose of promoting public understanding of and confidence in the administration of justice. In conducting such activities, the magisterial district judge must act in a manner consistent with these Conduct Rules.
Rule 1.3. Avoiding Abuse of the Prestige of Judicial Office.
A magisterial district judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests of the magisterial district judge or others, or allow others to do so.
Comment: (1) It is improper for a magisterial district judge to use or attempt to use his or her position to gain personal advantage or preferential treatment of any kind. For example, it would be improper for a magisterial district judge to allude to his or her judicial status to gain favorable treatment in encounters with traffic officials. Similarly, a magisterial district judge must not use judicial letterhead to gain an advantage in conducting his or her personal business. A magisterial district judge should also not lend the prestige of his or her office to advance the private interests of others, nor convey or knowingly permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the magisterial district judge.
(2) A magisterial district judge may provide a reference or recommendation for an individual based upon the magisterial district judge's personal knowledge. The magisterial district judge may use official letterhead if the magisterial district judge indicates that the reference is personal and if there is no likelihood that the use of the letterhead would reasonably be perceived as an attempt to exert pressure by reason of the judicial office.
(3) Magisterial district judges may participate in the process of judicial selection by cooperating with appointing authorities and screening committees, and by responding to inquiries from such entities concerning the professional qualifications of a person being considered for judicial office.
(4) Special considerations arise when magisterial district judges write or contribute to publications of for-profit entities, whether related or unrelated to the law. A magisterial district judge should not permit anyone associated with the publication of such materials to exploit the magisterial district judge's office in a manner that violates this Rule or other applicable law. In contracts for publication of a magisterial district judge's writing, the magisterial district judge should retain sufficient control over the advertising and promotion of such writing to avoid such exploitation.
Canon 2. A magisterial district judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially, competently, and diligently.
Rule
2.1. Giving Precedence to the Duties of Judicial Office. 2.2. Impartiality and Fairness. 2.3. Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment. 2.4. External Influences on Judicial Conduct. 2.5. Competence, Diligence and Cooperation. 2.6. Ensuring the Right to Be Heard. 2.7. Responsibility to Decide. 2.8. Decorum, Demeanor, and Communication in an Official Capacity. 2.9. Ex parte Communications. 2.10. Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases. 2.11. Disqualification. 2.12. Supervisory Duties. 2.13. Administrative Appointments. 2.14. Disability and Impairment. 2.15. Responding to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct. 2.16. Cooperation with Disciplinary Authorities. Rule 2.1. Giving Precedence to the Duties of Judicial Office.
The duties of judicial office, as prescribed by law, shall ordinarily take precedence over a magisterial district judge's personal and extrajudicial activities.
Comment: (1) Magisterial district judges shall devote the time necessary for the prompt and proper disposition of the business of their office, which shall be given priority over any other occupation, business, profession, pursuit or activity. A magisterial district judge's personal and extrajudicial activities should be arranged so as not to interfere unreasonably with the diligent discharge of the magisterial district judge's duties of office.
(2) To ensure that magisterial district judges are available to fulfill their judicial duties, magisterial district judges must conduct their personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflicts that would result in frequent disqualification. See Canon 3.
(3) Although it is not a duty of judicial office unless prescribed by law, magisterial district judges are encouraged to participate in activities that promote public understanding of and confidence in the administration of justice.
(4) Magisterial district judges shall not use or permit the use of premises established for the disposition of their magisterial business for any other occupation, business, profession or gainful pursuit.
Rule 2.2. Impartiality and Fairness.
A magisterial district judge shall uphold and apply the law, and shall perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.
Comment: (1) To ensure impartiality and fairness to all parties, a magisterial district judge must be objective and open-minded.
(2) Although each magisterial district judge comes to the bench with a unique background and personal philosophy, a magisterial district judge must interpret and apply the law without regard to whether the magisterial district judge approves or disapproves of the law in question. This comment is not intended to restrict the appropriate functions of the courts in statutory or common law review.
(3) When applying and interpreting the law, a magisterial district judge sometimes may make good-faith errors of fact or law. Errors of this kind do not violate this Rule.
(4) It is not a violation of this Rule for a magisterial district judge to make reasonable accommodations to ensure pro se litigants the opportunity to have their matters heard fairly and impartially.
Rule 2.3. Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall perform the duties of judicial office, including administrative duties, without bias or prejudice.
(B) A magisterial district judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in harassment, including but not limited to bias, prejudice, or harassment based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, and shall not permit court staff, court officials, or others subject to the magisterial district judge's direction and control to do so.
(C) A magisterial district judge shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice, or engaging in harassment, based upon attributes including but not limited to race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, against parties, witnesses, lawyers, or others.
(D) The restrictions of paragraphs (B) and (C) do not preclude magisterial district judges or lawyers from making legitimate reference to the listed factors, or similar factors, when they are relevant to an issue in a proceeding.
Comment: (1) A magisterial district judge who manifests bias or prejudice in a proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings the judiciary into disrepute.
(2) Examples of manifestations of bias or prejudice include but are not limited to epithets; slurs; demeaning nicknames; negative stereotyping; attempted humor based upon stereotypes; threatening, intimidating, or hostile acts; suggestions of connections between race, ethnicity, or nationality and crime; and irrelevant references to personal characteristics. Even facial expressions and body language can convey to parties and lawyers in the proceeding, the media, and others an appearance of bias or prejudice. A magisterial district judge must avoid conduct that may reasonably be perceived as prejudiced or biased.
(3) Harassment, as referred to in paragraphs (B) and (C), is verbal or physical conduct that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion toward a person on bases such as race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation.
(4) Sexual harassment includes but is not limited to sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is unwelcome.
(5) The Supreme Court's Rules and Policies, e.g., the Rules of Judicial Administration and the Unified Judicial System Policy on Non-Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity, have continued force and effect.
Rule 2.4. External Influences on Judicial Conduct.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall not be swayed by public clamor or fear of criticism.
(B) A magisterial district judge shall not permit family, social, political, financial, or other interests or relationships to influence the magisterial district judge's judicial conduct or judgment.
(C) A magisterial district judge shall not convey or permit others to convey the impression that any person or organization is in a position to influence the magisterial district judge.
Comment: An independent judiciary requires that magisterial district judges decide cases according to the law and facts, without regard to whether particular laws or litigants are popular or unpopular with the public, the media, government officials, or the magisterial district judge's friends or family. Confidence in the judiciary is eroded if judicial decision making is perceived to be subject to inappropriate outside influences.
Rule 2.5. Competence, Diligence and Cooperation.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall perform judicial and administrative duties competently and diligently.
(B) A magisterial district judge shall cooperate with other magisterial district judges and court officials in the administration of court business.
Comment: (1) Competence in the performance of judicial duties requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary to perform a magisterial district judge's responsibilities of judicial office.
(2) A magisterial district judge should seek the necessary docket time, court staff, expertise, and resources to discharge all adjudicative and administrative responsibilities.
(3) Prompt disposition of the court's business requires a magisterial district judge to devote adequate time to judicial duties, to be punctual in attending court and expeditious in determining matters under submission, and to take reasonable measures to ensure that court officials, litigants, and their lawyers cooperate with the magisterial district judge to that end.
(4) In disposing of matters promptly and efficiently, a magisterial district judge must demonstrate due regard for the rights of parties to be heard and to have issues resolved without unnecessary cost or delay. A magisterial district judge should monitor and supervise cases in ways that reduce or eliminate dilatory practices, avoidable delays, and unnecessary costs.
(5) Magisterial district judges should require their staffs to observe the standards of competence and diligence that apply to them.
Rule 2.6. Ensuring the Right to Be Heard.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall accord to every person or entity who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person or entity's lawyer or authorized representative, the right to be heard according to law.
(B) A magisterial district judge may encourage parties to a proceeding and their lawyers or authorized representatives to settle matters in dispute but shall not act in a manner that coerces any party into settlement.
Comment: (1) The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive rights of litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the right to be heard are observed.
(2) The magisterial district judge plays an important role in overseeing the settlement of disputes, but should be careful that efforts to further settlement do not undermine any party's right to be heard according to law.
Rule 2.7. Responsibility to Decide.
A magisterial district judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the magisterial district judge, except where the magisterial district judge has recused himself or herself or when disqualification is required by Rule 2.11 or other law.
Comment: (1) Magisterial district judges shall be available to decide the matters that come before the court. Although there are times when disqualification or recusal is necessary to protect the rights of litigants and preserve public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, magisterial district judges must be available to decide matters that come before the courts. Unwarranted disqualification or recusal may bring public disfavor to the court and to the magisterial district judge personally. The dignity of the court, the magisterial district judge's respect for fulfillment of judicial duties, and a proper concern for the burdens that may be imposed upon the magisterial district judge's colleagues require that a magisterial district judge should not use disqualification or recusal to avoid cases that present difficult, controversial, or unpopular issues.
(2) This Rule describes the duty of a magisterial district judge to decide matters assigned to the magisterial district judge. However, there may be instances where a magisterial district judge is disqualified from presiding over a particular matter or shall recuse himself or herself from doing so. A magisterial district judge is disqualified from presiding over a matter when a specified disqualifying fact or circumstance is present. See Rule 2.11. The concept of recusal envisioned in this Rule overlaps with disqualification. In addition, however, a magisterial district judge may recuse himself or herself from presiding over a matter even in the absence of a disqualifying fact or circumstance where—in the exercise of discretion, in good faith, and with due consideration for the general duty to hear and decide matters—the magisterial district judge concludes that prevailing facts and circumstances could engender a substantial question in reasonable minds as to whether disqualification nonetheless should be required. This test differs from the formerly applied common law test of whether ''a significant minority of the lay community could reasonably question the court's impartiality.''
(3) A magisterial district judge should disclose information that the magisterial district judge believes the parties or their lawyers might reasonably consider relevant to a possible motion for disqualification or recusal, even if the magisterial district judge believes there is no proper basis for disqualification or recusal.
Rule 2.8. Decorum, Demeanor, and Communication in an Official Capacity.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings before the court. They shall wear judicial robes while conducting hearings and trials.
(B) A magisterial district judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, witnesses, lawyers, authorized representatives, court staff, court officials, and others with whom the magisterial district judge deals in an official capacity, and shall require similar conduct of lawyers, court staff, court officials, and others subject to the magisterial district judge's direction and control.
(C) Magisterial district judges shall prohibit broadcasting, televising, recording or taking photographs in the courtroom and areas immediately adjacent thereto during sessions or recesses between sessions, except that magisterial district judges may authorize:
(1) the use of electronic or photographic means for the presentation of evidence, for the perpetuation of a record or for other purposes of judicial administration; and
(2) the broadcasting, televising, recording or photographing of investitive or ceremonial proceedings.
Comment: The duty to hear all proceedings with patience and courtesy is not inconsistent with the duty imposed in Rule 2.5 to dispose promptly of the business of the court. Magisterial district judges can be efficient and businesslike while being patient and deliberate.
Rule 2.9. Ex parte Communications.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the magisterial district judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers or authorized representatives, concerning a pending or impending matter, except as follows:
(1) When circumstances require it, ex parte communication for scheduling, administrative, or emergency purposes, which does not address substantive matters, is permitted, provided:
(a) the magisterial district judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage as a result of the ex parte communication; and
(b) the magisterial district judge makes provision promptly to notify all other parties of the substance of the ex parte communication, and gives the parties an opportunity to respond whenever the circumstances reasonably permit.
(2) A magisterial district judge may obtain the written advice of a disinterested expert on the law applicable to a proceeding before the magisterial district judge, if the magisterial district judge gives advance notice to the parties of the person to be consulted and the subject matter of the advice to be solicited, and affords the parties a reasonable opportunity to object and respond to the notice and to the advice received.
(3) A magisterial district judge may consult with court staff and court officials whose functions are to aid the magisterial district judge in carrying out the magisterial district judge's adjudicative responsibilities, or with other magisterial district judges, provided the magisterial district judge makes reasonable efforts to avoid receiving factual information that is not part of the record, and does not abrogate the responsibility to decide the matter personally.
(4) A magisterial district judge may initiate, permit, or consider any ex parte communication when expressly authorized by law to do so.
(B) If a magisterial district judge inadvertently receives an unauthorized ex parte communication bearing upon the substance of a matter, the magisterial district judge shall promptly notify the parties of the substance of the communication and provide the parties with an opportunity to respond.
(C) A magisterial district judge shall not investigate facts in a matter independently, and shall consider only the evidence presented and any facts that may properly be judicially noticed.
(D) A magisterial district judge shall make reasonable efforts, including providing appropriate supervision, to ensure that this Rule is not violated by court staff, court officials, and others subject to the magisterial district judge's direction and control.
(E) It is not a violation of this Rule for a magisterial district judge to initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications expressly authorized by law, such as when serving on therapeutic or problem-solving courts, mental health courts, or drug courts. In this capacity, a magisterial district judge may assume a more interactive role with the parties, treatment providers, probation officers, social workers, and others.
Comment: (1) To the extent reasonably possible, all parties or their lawyers shall be included in communications with a magisterial district judge.
(2) Whenever the presence of a party or notice to a party is required by this Rule, it is the party's attorney of record or authorized representative, or if the party is unrepresented, the party, who is to be present or to whom notice is to be given.
(3) The proscription against communications concerning a proceeding includes communications with lawyers, law teachers, and other persons who are not participants in the proceeding, except to the limited extent permitted by this Rule.
(4) A magisterial district judge shall avoid comments and interactions that may be interpreted as ex parte communications concerning pending matters or matters that may appear before the court, including a magisterial district judge who participates in electronic social media.
(5) A magisterial district judge may consult with other magisterial district judges on pending matters, but must avoid ex parte discussions of a case with magisterial district judges who have previously been disqualified from hearing the matter, and with judges who have appellate jurisdiction over the matter.
(6) The prohibition against a magisterial district judge investigating the facts in a matter extends to information available in all mediums, including electronic.
(7) A magisterial district judge may consult ethics advisory committees, outside counsel, or legal experts concerning the magisterial district judge's compliance with these Conduct Rules. Such consultations are not subject to the restrictions of paragraph (A)(2).
(8) In order to obtain the protection afforded to ex parte communication under paragraph (E) of this Rule, a magisterial district judge should take special care to make sure that the participants in such voluntary special court programs are made aware of and consent to the possibility of ex parte communications under paragraph (E).
Rule 2.10. Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall not make any public statement that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a matter pending or impending in any court, or make any nonpublic statement that might substantially interfere with a fair trial or hearing.
(B) A magisterial district judge shall not, in connection with cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of judicial office.
(C) A magisterial district judge shall require court staff, court officials, and others subject to the magisterial district judge's direction and control to refrain from making statements that the magisterial district judge would be prohibited from making by paragraphs (A) and (B).
(D) Notwithstanding the restrictions in paragraph (A), a magisterial district judge may make public statements in the course of official duties, may explain court procedures, and may comment on any proceeding in which the magisterial district judge is a litigant in a personal capacity.
(E) Subject to the requirements of paragraph (A), a magisterial district judge may respond directly or through a third party to allegations in the media or elsewhere concerning the magisterial district judge's conduct in a matter.
Comment: (1) This Rule's restrictions on judicial speech are essential to the maintenance of the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary. A magisterial district judge should be mindful that comments of a magisterial district judge regarding matters that are pending or impending in any court can sometimes affect the outcome or impair the fairness of proceedings in a matter. See Rule 1.2.
(2) This Rule does not prohibit a magisterial district judge from commenting on proceedings in which the magisterial district judge is a litigant in a personal capacity, or represents a client as permitted by these Rules. In cases in which the magisterial district judge is a litigant in an official capacity, such as a writ of mandamus, the magisterial district judge must not comment publicly.
(3) Depending upon the circumstances, the magisterial district judge should consider whether it may be preferable for a third party, rather than the magisterial district judge, to respond or issue statements in connection with allegations concerning the magisterial district judge's conduct in a matter.
(4) This Rule is not intended to impede a magisterial district judge from commenting upon legal issues or matters for pedagogical purposes.
Rule 2.11. Disqualification.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the magisterial district judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances:
(1) The magisterial district judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer, or personal knowledge of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.
(2) The magisterial district judge knows that the magisterial district judge, the magisterial district judge's spouse or domestic partner, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse or domestic partner of such a person is:
(a) a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, general partner, managing member, or trustee of a party;
(b) acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(c) a person who has more than a de minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding; or
(d) likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.
(3) The magisterial district judge knows that he or she, individually or as a fiduciary, or the magisterial district judge's spouse, domestic partner, parent, or child, or any other member of the magisterial district judge's family residing in the magisterial district judge's household, has an economic interest in the subject matter in controversy or is a party to the proceeding.
(4) The magisterial district judge knows or learns that a party, a party's lawyer, or the law firm of a party's lawyer has made a direct or indirect contribution(s) to the magisterial district judge's campaign in an amount that would raise a reasonable concern about the fairness or impartiality of the magisterial district judge's consideration of a case involving the party, the party's lawyer, or the law firm of the party's lawyer. In doing so, the magisterial district judge should consider the public perception regarding such contributions and their effect on the magisterial district judge's ability to be fair and impartial. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that recusal or disqualification is not warranted when a contribution or reimbursement for transportation, lodging, hospitality or other expenses is equal to or less than the amount required to be reported as a gift on a magisterial district judge's Statement of Financial Interest.
(5) The magisterial district judge, while a magisterial district judge or a judicial candidate, has made a public statement, other than in a court proceeding, judicial decision, or opinion, that commits the magisterial district judge to reach a particular result or rule in a particular way in the proceeding or controversy.
(6) The magisterial district judge:
(a) served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or was associated with a lawyer who participated substantially as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter during such association;
(b) served in governmental employment, and in such capacity participated personally and substantially as a lawyer or public official concerning the proceeding, or has publicly expressed in such capacity an opinion concerning the merits of the particular matter in controversy; or
(c) was a material witness concerning the matter.
(B) A magisterial district judge shall keep informed about the magisterial district judge's personal and fiduciary economic interests, and make a reasonable effort to keep informed about the personal economic interests of the magisterial district judge's spouse or domestic partner and minor children residing in the magisterial district judge's household.
(C) A magisterial district judge subject to disqualification under this Rule, other than for bias or prejudice under paragraph (A)(1), may disclose on the record the basis of the magisterial district judge's disqualification and may ask the parties and their lawyers to consider, outside the presence of the magisterial district judge and court personnel, whether to waive disqualification. If, following the disclosure, the parties and lawyers agree, without participation by the magisterial district judge or court personnel, that the magisterial district judge should not be disqualified, the magisterial district judge may participate in the proceeding. The agreement, in writing and signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be attached to the record copy of the complaint form.
Comment: (1) Under this Rule, a magisterial district judge is disqualified whenever the magisterial district judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, regardless of whether any of the specific provisions of paragraphs (A)(1) through (6) apply.
(2) A magisterial district judge's obligation not to hear or decide matters in which disqualification is required applies regardless of whether a motion to disqualify is filed.
(3) The rule of necessity may override the rule of disqualification. For example, a magisterial district judge might be the only magisterial district judge available in a matter requiring immediate judicial action, such as a hearing on probable cause. In matters that require immediate action, the magisterial district judge must disclose the basis for possible disqualification and make reasonable efforts to transfer the matter to another magisterial district judge as soon as practicable.
(4) The fact that a lawyer in a proceeding is affiliated with a law firm with which a relative of the magisterial district judge is affiliated does not itself disqualify the magisterial district judge. If, however, the magisterial district judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned under paragraph (A), or the relative is known by the magisterial district judge to have an interest in the law firm that could be substantially affected by the proceeding under paragraph (A)(2)(c), the magisterial district judge's disqualification is required.
(5) A magisterial district judge should disclose information that the magisterial district judge believes the parties or their lawyers might reasonably consider relevant to a possible motion for disqualification, even if the magisterial district judge believes there is no basis for disqualification.
(6) The procedure in Rule 2.11(C) is designed to minimize the chance that a party or lawyer will feel coerced into an agreement. When a party is not immediately available, magisterial district judges may proceed on the written assurance of the lawyers that their parties' consent will be subsequently filed.
(7) Rule 2.11(A)(4) represents a first inroad into complex issues associated with the financing of judicial campaigns in the scheme prescribed by the Pennsylvania Constitution, per which judicial officers are elected by the citizenry. See Pa. Const. art. V, § 13. For example, the rule presently does not address a number of circumstances which have arisen in the context of public judicial elections, including the involvement of political action committees (''PACs''). Under the direction of an independent board of directors, such entities may aggregate then distribute individual contributions among judicial campaigns, political campaigns, their own operating expenses, and other expenditures. There is no attempt, under the present rule, to require disqualification on account of individual contributions made to a PAC, so long as the organization does not serve as the alter-ego of a specific donor or donors. Rulemaking, in this regard, would require further study and deliberation in order to appropriately balance all respective interests involved. Thus, the Court has reserved any treatment to a later time.
Rule 2.12. Supervisory Duties.
A magisterial district judge should require court staff, court officials, and others subject to the magisterial district judge's direction and control to act in a manner consistent with the judge's obligations under these Conduct Rules.
Comment: A magisterial district judge may not direct court personnel to engage in conduct on the magisterial district judge's behalf or as the magisterial district judge's representative when such conduct would violate the Conduct Rules if undertaken by the magisterial district judge.
Rule 2.13. Administrative Appointments.
(A) In making administrative appointments and hiring decisions, a magisterial district judge or President Judge:
(1) shall exercise the power of appointment impartially and on the basis of merit; and
(2) shall avoid nepotism, favoritism, and unnecessary appointments.
(B) A magisterial district judge or President Judge shall not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.
Comment: (1) The concept of ''appointment'' includes hiring decisions. Appointees of a magisterial district judge or President Judge include personnel such as clerks and secretaries. Consent by the parties to an appointment or an award of compensation does not relieve the magisterial district judge or President Judge of the obligation prescribed by paragraph (A).
(2) Nepotism is the appointment of a magisterial district judge's or President Judge's spouse or domestic partner, or any relative within the third degree of relationship of either the magisterial district judge or President Judge, or the magisterial district judge's or President Judge's spouse or domestic partner, or the spouse or domestic partner of such relative.
Rule 2.14. Disability and Impairment.
A magisterial district judge having a reasonable belief that the performance of a lawyer or another magisterial district judge is impaired by drugs or alcohol, or by a mental, emotional, or physical condition, shall take appropriate action, which may include a confidential referral to a lawyer or judicial assistance program.
Comment: (1) ''Appropriate action'' means action intended and reasonably likely to help the magisterial district judge or lawyer in question address the problem and prevent harm to the justice system. Depending upon the circumstances, appropriate action may include but is not limited to speaking directly to the impaired person, notifying an individual with supervisory responsibility over the impaired person, or making a referral to an assistance program.
(2) Taking or initiating corrective action by way of referral to an assistance program may satisfy a magisterial district judge's responsibility under this Rule. Assistance programs have many approaches for offering help to impaired magisterial district judges and lawyers, such as intervention, counseling, or referral to appropriate health care professionals. Depending upon the gravity of the conduct that has come to the magisterial district judge's attention, however, the magisterial district judge may be required to take other action, such as reporting the impaired magisterial district judge or lawyer to the appropriate authority, agency, or body. See Rule 2.15.
Rule 2.15. Responding to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct.
(A) A magisterial district judge having knowledge that another magisterial district judge has committed a violation of these Conduct Rules that raises a substantial question regarding the magisterial district judge's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a magisterial district judge shall inform the appropriate authority.
(B) A magisterial district judge having knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question regarding the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer shall inform the appropriate authority.
(C) A magisterial district judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood that another magisterial district judge has committed a violation of these Conduct Rules shall take appropriate action.
(D) A magisterial district judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct shall take appropriate action.
Comment: (1) Taking action to address known misconduct is a magisterial district judge's obligation. Paragraphs (A) and (B) impose an obligation on the magisterial district judge to report to the appropriate authority or other agency or body the known misconduct of another magisterial district judge or a lawyer that raises a substantial question regarding the honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness of that magisterial district judge or lawyer. Ignoring or denying known misconduct among one's judicial colleagues or members of the legal profession undermines a magisterial district judge's responsibility to participate in efforts to ensure public respect for the justice system. This Rule limits the reporting obligation to those offenses that an independent judiciary must vigorously endeavor to prevent.
(2) A magisterial district judge who does not have actual knowledge that another magisterial district judge or a lawyer may have committed misconduct, but receives information indicating a substantial likelihood of such misconduct, is required to take appropriate action under paragraphs (C) and (D). Appropriate action may include, but is not limited to, communicating directly with the magisterial district judge who may have violated these Conduct Rules, communicating with a supervising judge, or reporting the suspected violation to the appropriate authority or other agency or body. Similarly, actions to be taken in response to information indicating that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct may include but are not limited to communicating directly with the lawyer who may have committed the violation, or reporting the suspected violation to the appropriate authority or other agency or body.
Rule 2.16. Cooperation with Disciplinary Authorities.
(A) A magisterial district judge shall cooperate and be candid and honest with judicial and lawyer disciplinary agencies.
(B) A magisterial district judge shall not retaliate, directly or indirectly, against a person known or suspected to have assisted or cooperated with an investigation of a magisterial district judge or a lawyer.
Comment: Cooperation with investigations and proceedings of judicial and lawyer discipline agencies, as required in paragraph (A), instills confidence in magisterial district judges' commitment to the integrity of the judicial system and the protection of the public.
[Continued on next Web Page] _______
1 Though not covered by these Conduct Rules, there is a Code of Conduct for Employees of the Unified Judicial System (''Employee Code''). It applies to ''employees'' defined as, ''Employees of the Unified Judicial System'' and includes 1) all state-level court employees, and 2) all county-level court employees who are under the supervision and authority of the President Judge of a Judicial District of Pennsylvania, unless otherwise indicated by Supreme Court order or rule.
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
