Mich. Code Judicial Conduct 4

As amended through June 5, 2024

Canon 4 - A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities

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, the 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. A judge should regulate extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial duties.

A judge may engage in the following activities:

A. Law-Related Activities.

(1) A judge may speak, write, lecture, teach, and participate in other activities concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice.

(2) A judge may appear at a public hearing before an executive or legislative body or official on matters concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice, and may otherwise consult with such executive or legislative body or official on such matters.

(3) A judge may serve as a member, officer, or director of an organization or governmental agency devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. A judge may participate in the management and investment of such an organization's funds.

(4) A judge may make recommendations to public and private fund-granting agencies on projects and programs concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice.

B. Avocational Activities. A judge may write, lecture, teach, speak, and consult on nonlegal subjects, appear before public nonlegal bodies, and engage in the arts, sports, and other social and recreational activities, if such avocational activities do not detract from the dignity of the office or interfere with the performance of judicial duties.

C. Civic and Charitable Activities. A judge may participate in civic and charitable activities that do not reflect adversely upon the judge's impartiality or interfere with the performance of judicial duties. A judge may serve and be listed as an officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of a bona fide educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization. A judge should not serve if it is likely that the organization will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge or will be regularly engaged in adversary proceedings in any court.

D. Fundraising Activities. A judge should not individually solicit funds for any educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization or any organization or governmental agency devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice or use or permit the use of the prestige of the office for that purpose. A judge may, however, serve as a member of an honorary committee or may join a general appeal on behalf of such an organization. A judge may speak or receive an award or other recognition in connection with an event of such an organization. A judge may allow his or her name or title to be used in advertising the judge's involvement in an event so long as the judge does not individually solicit funds.

E. Financial Activities.

(1) A judge should refrain from financial and business dealings that tend to reflect adversely on the judge's impartiality or judicial office, interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties, exploit the judicial position, or involve the judge in frequent transactions with lawyers or persons likely to come before the court on which the judge serves.

(2) Subject to the requirements of E(1), a judge may hold and manage investments, including real estate, and engage in other remunerative activity, but should not serve as director, officer, manager, advisor, or employee of any business. Provided, however, with respect to a judge holding office and serving as an officer, director, manager, advisor, or employee of any business not prohibited heretofore by law or judicial canon, the effective date of the prohibition contained herein shall be the date of expiration of the judge's current judicial term of office.

(3) A judge should manage investments and other financial interests to minimize the number of cases in which the judge is disqualified. As soon as it can be done without serious financial detriment, the judge should dispose of investments and other financial interests that require frequent disqualification.

(4) Neither a judge nor a family member residing in the judge's household should accept a gift, bequest, favor, or loan from anyone except as follows:

(a) A judge may accept a gift or gifts not to exceed a total value of $375, incident to a public testimonial; books supplied by publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or an invitation to the judge and spouse to attend a bar-related function or activity devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice.

(b) A judge or a family member residing in the judge's household may accept ordinary social hospitality; a gift, bequest, favor, or loan from a relative; a wedding or engagement gift; a loan from a lending institution in its regular course of business on the same terms generally available to persons who are not judges; or a scholarship or fellowship awarded on the same terms applied to other applicants.

(c) A judge or a family member residing in the judge's household may accept any other gift, bequest, favor, or loan only if the donor is not a party or other person whose interests have come or are likely to come before the judge, and if the aggregate value of gifts recievd by a judge or family member residing in the judge's household from any source exceeds $375, the judge reports it in the same manner as compensation is reported in Canon 6C. For purposes of reporting gifts under this subsection, any gift with a fair market value of $150 or less need not be aggregated to determine if the $375 reporting threshold has been met.

(5) For the purposes of this section, "family member residing in the judge's household" means any relative of a judge by blood or marriage, or a person treated by a judge as a family member, who resides in the judge's household.

(6) A judge is not required by this code to disclose income, debts, or investments, except as provided in this canon and Canons 3 and 6.

(7) Information acquired by a judge in a judicial capacity should not be used or disclosed by the judge in financial dealings or for any other purpose not related to judicial duties.

F. Fiduciary Activities. A judge should not serve as an executor, administrator, testamentary trustee, or guardian, except for the estate, testamentary trust, or person of a member of the judge's immediate family, and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties. As a family fiduciary, a judge is subject to the following restrictions:

(1) A judge should not serve if it is likely that as such fiduciary the judge 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.

(2) While acting as such fiduciary, a judge is subject to the same restrictions on financial activities that apply in the judge's personal capacity.

G. Arbitration. A judge should not act as an arbitrator or mediator, except in the performance of judicial duties.

H. Practice of Law. A judge should not practice law for compensation except as otherwise provided by law.

I. Extra-judicial Appointments. A judge should not accept appointment to a governmental committee, commission, or other 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, however, may represent the country, state, or locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational, and cultural activities.

Mich. Code Judicial Conduct 4

The Code of Judicial Conduct was updated March 9, 2016; amended effective 2/28/2018.

Staff Comment: This amendment increases the acceptable value for a gift given incident to a public testimonial, and likewise increases the threshold amount for disclosure of a gift. This increase is the first revision since the $100 value threshold was adopted in 1974.

The threshold amount for reporting gifts is widely variable among the states and federal government. The disclosure threshold for reporting gifts in other states, established by statute or court rule, ranges from $50 to $500. Many states do not have a threshold amount at all; instead, such states may prohibit the acceptance of gifts from certain classes of donors, or alternatively allow judges to accept a certain class of gifts without regard to value for specific events, such as a wedding, or 25th or 50th wedding anniversary. The Court also considered the increase in the value of money since the $100 threshold was adopted. According to the American Institute for Economic Research, the value of $100 in today's economy is $495.92.

The Court used the federal disclosure rule and threshold as its model. For federal judges, the gift disclosure amount is $375, as established by the Judicial Conference. The instructions for submitting the annual disclosure report require a federal judge to:

Report information on gifts aggregating more than $375 in value received by the filer, spouse and dependent child from any source other than a relative during the reporting period. Any gift with a fair market value of $150 or less need not be aggregated to determine if the $375 reporting threshold has been met.

Thus, similar to the federal rule, the amendment increases the disclosure threshold to $375, but requires gifts to the judge and his family members from a single source to be aggregated for purposes of reporting. Gifts with value less than $150 would not need to be included in this aggregate amount. Further, the amendment does not change the restriction that a gift may be accepted under this subsection only if the donor is not a party or other person whose interests have come or are likely to come before the judge.

The staff comment is not an authoritative construction by the Court. In addition, adoption of an amendment in no way reflects a substantive determination by this Court.