Opinion 25-127

September 10, 2025

Digest:  A judge may invite his/her recent former law clerk to conduct training for the court’s incoming law clerks, even after the law clerk has commenced employment with a private law firm that regularly appears in the judge’s court.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.2(C); 100.3(B)(1); 100.3(C)(2); Opinions 24-34; 10-166; 05-82.

Opinion:

          The inquiring judge’s law clerk has accepted employment with a private law firm that frequently appears in the judge’s court.  Given the law clerk’s “vast experience preparing for trial,” the judge would like to bring him/her back to the courthouse to teach a course on drafting jury instructions for the judge’s new law clerk as well as the incoming law clerks of other interested judges.  The former law clerk would not be compensated for the training program, and would co-present it with the judge.  The judge asks if this is ethically permissible, after the law clerk has commenced employment with the law firm.

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]).  A judge must “maintain professional competence” in the law (22 NYCRR 100.3[B][1]) and must require staff subject to the judge’s direction and control to “observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the judge” (22 NYCRR 100.3[C][2]).  However, a judge must not “convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge” (22 NYCRR 100.2[C]).

          Judges and their law clerks often attend legal presentations by private attorneys, whether at bar association programs, judicial association programs, or at programs offered “in-house” by the Judicial Institute.  This does not ordinarily create an appearance of impropriety.  To the contrary, we have advised that a judge’s law clerk “may attend a Continuing Legal Education program sponsored by a private law firm, but the law clerk should not permit the registration fee to be waived” (Opinion 05-82).

          A judge also may organize and co-sponsor a continuing legal education program regarding family violence for “lawyers and members of the courthouse staff,” where the proposed speakers include a broad spectrum of outside attorneys such as “defense attorneys, prosecutors, [and] children's lawyers” (Opinion 10-166).  Similarly, we have said a supervising judge may bring in uncompensated outside speakers, including practicing attorneys, as part of an “ongoing ‘lunch and learn’ program for judges and court personnel,” subject to certain provisos designed to achieve a suitable overall balance of speakers and content consistent with judicial impartiality (Opinion 24-34).

          Here, too, we can see no impropriety in this judge inviting his/her recent former law clerk to help teach the court’s incoming law clerks how to draft jury instructions for their judges.  The proposed topic does not lend itself to discussing the law firm’s recent, pending, or impending cases.  Indeed, to the contrary, it clearly draws on the attorney’s prior public sector experience with the judge, rather than any experience in private practice.