Opinion 26-82
May 7, 2026
Digest: A part-time town justice who also serves as a full-time court attorney to a city court judge may preside in a criminal case that originated in the town court and was returned there after the city court judge conducted the defendant’s arraignment in a centralized arraignment part, provided the town justice had no involvement in the arraignment as a court attorney.
Rules: Judiciary Law § 14; 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.2(B); 100.3(A); 100.3(E)(1); 100.6(B)(4); Opinions 24-107; 19-12; 18-184; 18-23/18-56; 16-162.
Opinion:
The inquiring part-time town justice also works full-time as a court attorney to a city court judge. Recently, in the county’s centralized arraignment part, the city court judge arraigned a defendant on a criminal complaint that originated in the town court. The inquiring justice had absolutely no involvement in the arraignment as a court attorney and did not discuss the matter with the city court judge.[1] The justice asks if he/she may preside in the matter upon its return to the town court post-arraignment.
A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety and must act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2[A]). A judge’s judicial duties “take precedence” over all his/her other activities (22 NYCRR 100.3[A]). Thus, although a part-time judge may accept outside public employment, such employment must not conflict with or interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties (see 22 NYCRR 100.6[B][4]). A judge must also disqualify him/herself where the judge’s impartiality “might reasonably be questioned” (22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]; Judiciary Law § 14).
Where a part-time town or village justice also serves as a law clerk or court attorney to a superior court judge, one primary safeguard is insulation: he/she must be insulated as a non-judicial court employee from all matters originating in the justice court where he/she presides (see Opinions 19-12; 18-184; 16-162). The insulation must be disclosed in the superior court, and is not subject to waiver or remittal (see Opinions 19-12; 24-107). Provided that insulation is maintained, the justice may preside in matters that return to the originating court after superior court proceedings (see Opinion 18-23/18-56).
The same principles apply here. Accordingly, we conclude that a part-time town justice who also serves as a full-time court attorney to a city court judge may preside in a criminal case that originated in the town court and was returned there after the city court judge conducted the defendant’s arraignment in a centralized arraignment part, provided the town justice had no involvement in the arraignment as a court attorney.
[1] When arraignments in the centralized arraignment part take place on nights or weekends, we expect that full-time court attorneys would rarely, if ever, have any involvement.