Opinion 26-40
March 26, 2026
Digest: Where an obituary notice for a judge’s relative asked well-wishers to support one of the relative’s selected charities in lieu of flowers, the judge need not disclose or disqualify when one of those charities appears before the judge, provided he/she can remain fair and impartial.
Rules: 22 NYCRR 100.0(I); 100.2; 100.2(A)-(B); 100.3(E)(1); Opinions 15-223; 15-163; 04-140.
Opinion:
The inquiring judge states that the obituary notice for his/her relative, in keeping with the relative’s wishes, asked well-wishers to support one of the relative’s selected charities in lieu of sending flowers.[1] The obituary notice also briefly mentioned the judge by name and title and provided basic information about opportunities to attend gatherings in honor and memory of the decedent. The inquiring judge now asks if he/she may preside when one of the named charitable organizations appears “as a party, counsel, or amicus.”
A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety and must always promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2[A]). The judge must “not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment” (22 NYCRR 100.2[B]) and must disqualify in any proceeding where the judge’s impartiality “might reasonably be questioned” (22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]).
Where a judge learns that “an attorney appearing before him/her made a charitable donation to honor the judge’s deceased relative, as suggested by the relative’s published obituary,” we have said the judge “has no duty to disclose the donation or recuse him/herself in the matter” (Opinion 15-163). As we explained (id.):
it is not reasonable to question a judge’s capacity to act impartially in a matter merely because an attorney appearing before the judge made a charitable contribution to honor the judge’s deceased relative. While specific traditions may vary by culture, friends and acquaintances of a bereaved individual are often moved by sympathy or politeness to acknowledge the death in culturally appropriate ways.
Thus, for purposes of our disqualification analysis under Section 100.3(E)(1), the sole question before us is whether it matters that the party, counsel, or amicus before the judge is not the person making the donation, as in Opinion 15-163, but is instead the charitable organization receiving the donations.
In our view, it makes no difference. We have previously advised that a judge who makes a monetary contribution to a not-for-profit legal services organization need not make any disclosure nor disqualify him/herself in matters involving that organization, provided he/she can be fair and impartial (see Opinion 04-140). Likewise, where a judge, as co-trustee of a relative’s charitable trust, has authorized the trust to make charitable donations to “not-for-profit entities that regularly appear before the judge, including legal services providers and agencies to which the judge may make referrals,” we advised that “neither disclosure nor disqualification is required when a recipient of the trust’s charitable donations appears before him/her” (Opinion 15-223).
Here, in our view, it is even less reasonable to question the judge’s impartiality, merely because a not-for-profit organization has received, or is likely to receive, charitable contributions from various third parties in honor of the judge’s deceased relative. Accordingly, we conclude that where an obituary notice for the judge’s relative asked well-wishers to support one of the relative’s selected charities in lieu of flowers, the judge need not disclose or disqualify when one of those charities appears before the judge, provided he/she can remain fair and impartial.
[1] We use the word “relative” here as a succinct synonym for the defined term, “member of the judge’s family,” which denotes “a spouse, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent or other relative or person with whom the judge maintains a close familial relationship” (22 NYCRR 100.0[I]).