Opinion
ADKT 353.
October 28, 2003.
MIRIAM SHEARING, Associate Justice, ROBERT E. ROSE, Associate Justice, MYRON E. LEAVITT, Associate Justice, NANCY A. BECKER, Associate Justice, A. WILLIAM MAUPIN, Associate Justice, MARK GIBBONS, Associate Justice.
ORDER AMENDING COMMENTARY TO CANON 4C(3)(b) OF THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
WHEREAS, the Honorable Nancy Becker, Associate Justice, and the Honorable Michael L. Douglas, District Judge. Eighth Judicial District Court, have petitioned this court to amend the commentary to Canon 4C(3)(b) of the Code of Judicial Conduct to eliminate language that may discourage members of the judiciary from assisting legal services organizations in the recruitment of attorneys or law firms to provide pro bono legal services; and
WHEREAS, the provision of pro bono legal services furthers the administration of justice by improving access to the courts; and
WHEREAS, Rule 191 of the Supreme Court Rules sets aspirational goals for all active members of the State Bar of Nevada to provide pro bono legal services; and
WHEREAS, this court has considered written comments on the petition submitted by the Standing Committee on Judicial Ethics and Election Practices, the Eighth Judicial District Pro Bono Foundation. Clark County Legal Services, and a group of interested faculty from the William S. Boyd School of Law at the University of Nevada — Las Vegas; and
WHEREAS, this court heard public comment on the petition during a public administrative meeting on September 23, 2003, and determined that amendment of the commentary to Canon 4C(3)(b) of the Code of Judicial Conduct is warranted, accordingly.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the commentary to Canon 4C(3)(b) of the Code of Judicial Conduct shall be amended and shall read as set forth in Exhibit A.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this rule amendment shall be effective immediately. The clerk of this court shall cause a notice of entry of this order to be published in the official publication of the State Bar of Nevada. Publication of this order shall be accomplished by the clerk disseminating copies of this order to all subscribers of the advance sheets of the Nevada Reports and all persons and agencies listed in NRS 2.345, and to the executive director of the State Bar of Nevada. The certificate of the clerk of this court as to the accomplishment of the above-described publication of notice of entry and dissemination of this order shall be conclusive evidence of the adoption and publication of the foregoing rule amendment.
Dated this 28th day of October, 2003.
EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT TO COMMENTARY TO CANON 4C(3)(b) OF THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT Commentary Canon 4C(3)(b)
A judge may solicit membership or endorse or encourage membership efforts for an organization devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system or the administration of justice as long as the solicitation cannot reasonably be perceived as coercive and is not essentially a fund-raising mechanism. Solicitation of funds for an organization and solicitation of memberships similarly involve the danger that the person solicited will feel obligated to respond favorably to the solicitor if the solicitor is in a position of influence or control. A judge must not engage in direct, individual solicitation of funds or memberships in person, in writing or by telephone except in the following cases: (1) a judge may solicit for funds or memberships other judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority: (2) a judge may solicit other persons for membership in the organization described above if neither those persons nor persons with whom they are affiliated are likely ever to appear before the court on which the judge serves; (3) a judge who is an officer of such an organization may send a general membership solicitation mailing over the judge's signature; and (4) a judge may be listed as a host or member of an honorary dinner committee for an organization's fund-raising event.
Recruitment of attorneys or law firms to provide pro bono legal services pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 191 is not membership solicitation. A judge may assist an organization in recruiting attorneys so long as the recruitment effort cannot reasonably be perceived as coercive. [A judge must not engage in direct, individual recruitment of attorneys in person, in writing or by telephone.] A judge may provide an organization with general endorsement or solicitation material for use in the organization's recruitment materials. Similarly, this Section does not preclude a judge from requesting an attorney to accept pro bono representation of a party in a proceeding pending before the judge.
Use of an organization letterhead for fund-raising or membership solicitation does not violate Section 4C(3)(b) provided the letterhead lists only the judge's name and office or other position in the organization, and, if comparable designations are listed for other persons, the judge's judicial designation. In addition, a judge must also make reasonable efforts to ensure that the judge's staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control do not solicit funds on the judge's behalf for any purpose, law-related or otherwise.
A judge may be a speaker or guest of honor at such an organization's fund-raising event.