Opinion 25-115

September 10, 2025

Digest:  A county court judge who is disqualified from presiding over a matter is also disqualified from reassigning the matter from one local justice court to another.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.3(C)(1); 100.3(E)(1); Opinions 21-172; 21-151; 20-73; 17-169/17-170; 14-192; 08-71.

Opinion:

          The inquiring county court judge is sometimes asked to reassign criminal matters from one local justice court to another, after the justices in the original court have recused themselves.  The judge asks if it is ethically permissible to do so in situations where he/she would be unable to preside due to a conflict, such as when the defendant is a former client from the judge’s prior employment as an assistant public defender.

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety and act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2[A]).  A judge must therefore disqualify in any proceeding where the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]).  A judge must also diligently discharge his/her administrative duties without bias or prejudice (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[C][1]).

Prior Employment as Assistant Public Defender – Quick Review of General Principles

          A judge who previously represented clients as an assistant public defender is permanently disqualified, without the possibility of remittal, in any case where the judge previously participated in any way as an attorney, including minimally (see Opinions 21-172; 21-151).  This disqualification extends to the exercise of supervisory authority over an attorney who was personally involved in the case (see Opinions 21-172; 20-73).  Indeed, a judge who headed the Public Defender’s office is deemed to have been “directly involved in each matter of the office,” and is therefore disqualified from all cases pending in the office during his/her tenure (Opinion 17-169/17-170).

A judge is also disqualified, subject to remittal, from all matters involving the judge’s former clients, for two years after the attorney-client relationship completely ends (see Opinions 21-172; 21-151; see also Opinion 20-73 [disqualification is required only if the judge recognizes a party as a former client or if such former representation is otherwise brought to the judge’s attention]). Where the judge worked for a public sector agency such as the Public Defender’s office, the two-year period runs from the date the judge left the agency (see Opinion 21-151).  After that period has elapsed, the judge has no further obligation with respect to the former clients; the decision whether to disclose or recuse in such matters is confined solely to the judge’s discretion after considering all relevant factors (see id.).

Analysis of Current Inquiry

          When a judge is disqualified from presiding over a matter, the disqualification precludes involvement in the matter “even if the judge deems these appearances to be ‘routine’ or ministerial in nature” (Opinion 08-71).  Thus, we have advised that “if a supervising judge is required to exercise any discretion in assigning or re-assigning a case, the judge should disqualify him/herself from doing so in any case over which he/she could not personally preside” (Opinion 14-192).  Where, as here, it appears that there is more than one local court in the county to which the inquiring judge could reassign a case, the judge may not reassign a matter from which he/she is disqualified but must instead allow another county court judge to make the assignment.