STANDING COMMITTEE ON RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Court rules
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
STANDING COMMITTEE ON RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULES CHANGES
The Rules Committee submitted Parts I and II of its One
Hundred Seventy-Eighth Report to the Court of Appeals on April 29,
2013 and June 26, 2013, respectively, recommending rescission of
Title 16 of the Maryland Rules of Procedure and replacement of it
by new Title 16 (Court Administration), Title 18 (Judges and
Judicial Appointees), and Title 19 (Attorneys).
The Committee now
has submitted to the Court its Supplement to Part II, transmitting
thereby proposed new Title 18, as revised.
The Committee’s Supplement to Part II of its One Hundred
Seventy-Eighth Report and the proposed new rules are set forth
below.
Interested persons are asked to consider the Supplement to
Part II of the Committee’s Report and proposed rules changes and to
forward on or before April 11, 2016 any written comments they may
wish to make to:
Sandra F. Haines, Esq.
Reporter, Rules Committee
2011-D Commerce Park Drive
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
BESSIE M. DECKER
Clerk
Court of Appeals of Maryland
March 11, 2016
The Honorable Mary Ellen Barbera,
Chief Judge
The Honorable Lynne A. Battaglia
The Honorable Clayton Greene, Jr.
The Honorable Sally D. Adkins
The Honorable Robert N. McDonald
The Honorable Shirley M. Watts
The Honorable Michele D. Hotten
Judges
The Court of Appeals of Maryland
Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeal Building
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Your Honors:
The Rules Committee submits this Supplement to Part II of its
One Hundred Seventy-Eighth Report and recommends that the Court
adopt the Rules transmitted with this Supplement.
Part II was
submitted to the Court on June 26, 2013 and was the subject of an
open hearing on October 17, 2013. Final action on the Report was
deferred until Part III could be prepared and submitted. That Part
is being submitted contemporaneously with this Supplement and the
Supplement to Part I.
Part II collects, updates, reorganizes, and makes style
revisions in the Rules governing judges and judicial appointees,
all in a new Title 18 to the Maryland Rules. Title 18 is divided
into six chapters:
Chapter 100: Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct
Chapter 200: Maryland Code of Conduct for Judicial
Appointees
Chapter 300: Judicial Ethics Committee
Chapter 400: Judicial Discipline
Chapter 500: Marriage Ceremonies
Chapter 600: Miscellaneous Provisions
-2-
In accordance with what the Committee did in presenting Part
III and the Supplement to Part I, it is presenting this Supplement
to Part II in two ways. Because all of the Rules are actually new
ones, wholly rewritten, they are presented in the form they would
read if the Court adopts them (the “clean” version). In order for
the Court and the public to see the actual changes made from the
current Rules, however, they are presented as well, in a separate
binder, with those changes marked by the underlining of new
language and strikeouts of current language.
Chapter 100:
Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct
Chapter 100 consists of the current Code of Judicial Conduct
adopted by the Court in 2010. Most of the textual changes are ones
of style. The word “attorney” has been substituted for “lawyer”
and, when appropriate, “individual” has been substituted for
“person,” to conform to the terminology in other Rules, and crossreferences have been modified to conform with style and renumbering
changes.
With some modifications, the current Code of Judicial Conduct
follows the format of the 2007 version of the American Bar
Association (ABA) Model Code which, in contrast to earlier
versions, states the enforceable ethical commands in the form of
Rules rather than canons supplemented by comments.
The entire
Code, with its 36 internal Rules, was adopted as Maryland Rule 16813, which creates the anomaly of one Rule adopting 36 other Rules.
Because each of the internal Rules is a self-contained command
that has the force of law, the Rules Committee believes that each
should be stated as a separate Maryland Rule but that, for
convenience, the numbering of those Rules should be generally
consistent with the numbering system of the ABA Model Code. To
that end, the Code comprises a Chapter of Title 18 rather than just
one Rule, but each Rule in the Chapter matches the Rule number of
the ABA Model Code. Thus, for example, ABA Model Code Rule 1.1
(Compliance with the Law) appears as Maryland Rule 18-101.1
(Compliance with the Law) and, in its caption, refers to ABA Rule
1.1, and ABA Model Code Rule 2.2 (Impartiality and Fairness)
appears as Maryland Rule 18-102.2 (Impartiality and Fairness) and,
in its caption, refers to ABA Rule 2.2. The Chairs of the Judicial
Ethics Committee and the Commission on Judicial Disabilities, prior
to the submission of Part II in 2013, concurred in that approach.
The only change that is not purely one of style is to correct
a possible ambiguity in Rule 18-103.10 (b)(2)(B), which places a
limitation on the ability of a part-time orphans’ court judge who
is an attorney to practice law. The language in the current Rule
could be construed as not permitting the judge to appear in the
court on which he or she serves, even in a matter involving his
-3-
personal interest, which would be both unfair and inconsistent with
what any other judge may do.
Chapter 200:
Maryland Code of Conduct for Judicial
Appointees
Chapter 200 consists of the current Code of Conduct for
Judicial Appointees adopted by the Court in 2010 as Maryland Rule
16-814. It is patterned on the Code of Judicial Conduct. As with
the Code of Judicial Conduct, the Rules Committee proposes to put
this Code in a separate chapter and make each of the internal rules
separate Maryland Rules, using a numbering system that parallels
that of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Most of the changes are ones
of
style
and
adjusting
cross-references.
There
are
two
modifications that deserve comment.
Rule 18-202.13 deals with administrative appointments made by
judicial appointees.
The Rule largely tracks Rule 18-102.13
applicable to administrative appointments by judges, but, to the
extent that judicial appointees are authorized to make any
administrative appointments, that authority is far more limited
than with respect to judges. A textual amendment to section (a) of
the Rule and a Committee note following the Rule are intended to
clarify that the Rule should not be interpreted as a source of
authority
for judicial
appointees
to
make
administrative
appointments. To the extent that authority exists, it must come
from another source.
A clarifying amendment, in the form of a Committee note, also
is added to Rule 18-203.10, dealing with the practice of law by
judicial appointees. There is a Rule on that subject applicable to
judges – Rule 18-103.10. One of the differences between the two
Rules is the inclusion of a section (c) in Rule 18-203.10, which
requires a full-time judicial appointee who practiced law prior to
assuming his or her judicial duties to enter into an agreement for
payments, if any, relating to the appointee’s former practice and
declares that a payout period of five years is presumptively
reasonable.
That provision does not appear in Rule 18-103.10
because a similar provision appears in a 2005 Administrative Order
of the Chief Judge.
The Committee note calls attention to the
Administrative Order.
Chapter 300: Judicial Ethics Committee
Chapter 300 contains the Rules dealing with the Judicial
Ethics Committee. The structure, duties, and operations of the
Judicial Ethics Committee are currently found in Rule 16-812.1.
The Rules Committee proposes to separate those provisions into
-4-
eight Rules that comprise Chapter 300. The structure and, with one
exception, the duties of the Committee are unchanged.
Current Rule 16-812.1 (i)(5) requires the Judicial Ethics
Committee to submit recommendations for necessary or desirable
changes “in any ethics provision” directly to the Court of Appeals.
The delegation of responsibility for recommending changes in the
Code of Judicial Conduct – the “ethics provisions” – has varied in
the past. The initial 1971 Code, denominated as the Canons and
Rules of Judicial Ethics, emanated from a Report of the Judicial
Conference Committee on Judicial Ethics. See Rules Order of May 4,
1971.
Subsequent amendments, developed by the later-created
Judicial Ethics Committee, were submitted for consideration by the
Judicial Conference and were recommended to the Court by the
Conference. The most recent 2010 revision -- a complete rewriting
-– came to the Court directly from a special committee appointed by
the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals, the Maryland Committee to
Review the 2007 Model Code of Judicial Conduct. The comparable
revision of the Code for Judicial Appointees was the product of the
Rules Committee. See Rules Order of March 9, 2010.
Unquestionably, the Judicial Ethics Committee should be a
source of proposed changes to the Code of Judicial Conduct, but,
especially since that Code is now in the form of Rules, the Rules
Committee recommends that proposals by the Judicial Ethics
Committee for amendments to “ethics provisions” be submitted first
to the Rules Committee where, in open hearings, the views of
stakeholders other than just judges or members of the Judicial
Ethics Committee can be considered.
Proposed Rule 18-307, dealing with opinions and letters of
advice, modifies the current Rule to reflect more clearly what the
Judicial Ethics Committee actually does.
Those changes were
recommended by the Judicial Ethics Committee.
Current Rule 16-812.1 (j)(5) provides that a “State official
in the Judicial Branch” who requests an opinion as to the
application of an ethics provision and is in compliance with the
opinion or letter of advice issued by the committee is protected
from a charge of violating that provision. The Judicial Ethics
Committee issues both opinions and letters of advice. Some, but
not all, opinions are designated by the Committee for publication.
Letters of advice and unpublished opinions are declared by Rule 16812.1 (j)(6) to be confidential. Published opinions obviously are
not confidential although, in published form, the identities of the
individual who requested the opinion, individuals mentioned in the
opinion, and the court or geographic location of the individual who
requested the opinion are redacted.
During the course of reorganizing Rule 16-812.1, the Rules
Committee raised the question of whether any judge – not just the
-5-
judge who requested the opinion – who conforms his or her conduct
to a published opinion of the Judicial Ethics Committee also should
be protected from a charge of violating the ethics provision that
is the subject of the opinion.
The Chair of the Judicial
Disabilities Commission and Investigative Counsel to that
Commission supported such a change. The Judicial Ethics Committee,
however, opposed the change.
The Rules Committee considered both views and concluded that,
although compliance with unpublished opinions and advice letters
should provide protection only to the individual who requested the
opinion, the purpose of publishing opinions is to provide guidance
to all State officials in the Judicial Branch, not just the one who
requested the opinion, and that a judge who conforms his or her
conduct to a published opinion should not be required to request a
second opinion applicable just to him or her in order to have the
benefit of protection.
Chapter 400:
Judicial Discipline
Chapter 400 reorganizes the Rules dealing with the Commission
on Judicial Disabilities, now found in Rules 16-803 through 16-810.
Most of the changes are either ones of style or are intended to
clarify ambiguities in the current Rules and conform the Rules to
actual practice.
New language in Rule 18-404, dealing with complaints and
initial review by Investigative Counsel, reflect more clearly how
complaints actually are handled.
The current Rules refer to
complaints and formal complaints, the latter being under oath, but
provide that, unless Investigative Counsel decides to act on his or
her own initiative, only formal complaints will be considered.
Rule 18-404 eliminates the notion of formal complaints and provides
instead that, in order to be considered, a complaint must be under
oath and that, if a written allegation of misconduct or disability
not under oath is filed, Investigative Counsel must inform the
complainant of the requirement of an oath and give the complainant
an opportunity to correct the omission.
In conformance with amendments made to other Rules on the same
subject, Rule 18-406 (b)(3) permits any person named or depicted in
an item specified in a subpoena, rather than just the person named
in or served with the subpoena, to seek a protective order.
Also in conformance with changes made to other Rules, Rule 18408 (d) eliminates the requirement of publishing notices of
hearings in the Maryland Register but requires, instead, posting of
notice on the Judiciary website, and subsection (i)(1) of that Rule
clarifies that the judge has the right to have witnesses
-6-
subpoenaed.
In Rule 18-410, subsection (a)(2) is clarified by expressly
exempting the disclosure requirements of Rule 18-407 from the
confidentiality requirement of Rule 18-410. Also in Rule 18-410,
at the request of the Court, a new subsection (b)(3) is added to
permit the Commission to disclose to the Court of Appeals or a
judge of that Court the same otherwise confidential information the
Commission may disclose to judicial nominating commissions, bar
admission authorities, and others under subsection (b)(4)(A).
The Chapter 400 Rules were reviewed and approved by the Chair
of the Judicial Disabilities Commission and Investigative Counsel.
Chapter 500:
Marriage Ceremonies
The Rules in Chapter 500 are derived from current Rules 16-821
through 16-824. With one exception, the changes are ones of style.
In Rule 18-502, dealing with the scheduling of marriage ceremonies,
the Rules Committee proposes to add that, without the approval of
the administrative judge, a ceremony may not be performed in a
courthouse on a court holiday or when the courthouse is otherwise
closed.
Chapter 600:
Miscellaneous Provisions
Chapter 600 contains Rules dealing with judicial leave,
reports by circuit court judges, and financial disclosure
statements.
With two exceptions, the proposed changes are
clarifying ones.
Rule 18-601 (Judicial Leave) is a revision of current Rule 16104.
There are four types of judicial leave – annual leave,
personal leave, sick leave, and “other excused absences,” which can
be for a variety of reasons.1 Some of the “other excused absences”
can involve substantial amounts of time.
The Committee is
recommending a new section (e) to the Rule, directing that a
judge’s entitlement to “other excused absences” be as prescribed in
policies on judicial absence adopted by the State Court
Administrator and approved by the Court of Appeals. The Committee
1
A 2010 Administrative Order on Judicial Leave identified 15
types of “other excused absences” – accident leave,
administrative leave, bereavement leave, disaster service leave,
emergency release leave, family care leave, holiday leave,
interview leave, judicial education leave, jury duty leave, legal
action leave, military administrative leave, organ donation
leave, outreach leave, and religious observance leave.
-7-
also recommends, in a new section (i), that judges be required to
report to the State Court Administrator the leave taken by the
judge.
Rule 18-602 is derived from current Rule 16-105 dealing with
reports required by circuit court judges. Rule 18-603 makes style
changes to current Rule 16-815 dealing with annual financial
statements required of judges. It clarifies some ambiguities in
the current Rule concerning what happens when a judge fails to file
timely a required statement. Rule 18-604 makes similar changes to
current Rule 16-816 dealing with annual financial statements
required of judicial appointees.
Respectfully submitted,
Alan M. Wilner
Chair
AMW:cdc
cc: Bessie M. Decker, Clerk
-8-
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 100 - MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, DEFINITIONS,
AND PREAMBLE OF THE CODE
Rule 18-100.1.
Rule 18-100.2.
Rule 18-100.3.
Rule 18-100.4.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
SCOPE
DEFINITIONS
PREAMBLE
RULES GOVERNING JUDICIAL INTEGRITY AND
THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-101.1.
Rule 18-101.2.
Rule 18-101.3.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW (ABA RULE 1.1)
PROMOTING CONFIDENCE IN THE JUDICIARY (ABA
RULE (1.2)
AVOIDING LENDING THE PRESTIGE OF JUDICIAL
OFFICE (ABA RULE 1.3)
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.1.
GIVING PRECEDENCE TO THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL
OFFICE (ABA RULE 2.1)
Rule 18-102.2. IMPARTIALITY AND FAIRNESS (ABA RULE 2.2)
Rule 18-102.3. BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND HARASSMENT (ABA RULE 2.3)
Rule 18-102.4. EXTERNAL INFLUENCE ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT (ABA RULE 2.4)
Rule 18-102.5. COMPETENCE, DILIGENCE, AND COOPERATION (ABA RULE 2.5)
Rule 18-102.6. ENSURING THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD (ABA RULE 2.6)
Rule 18-102.7. RESPONSIBILITY TO DECIDE (ABA RULE 2.7)
Rule 18-102.8. DECORUM, DEMEANOR, AND COMMUNICATION WITH JURORS
(ABA RULE 2.8)
Rule 18-102.9. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS (ABA RULE 2.9)
Rule 18-102.10. JUDICIAL STATEMENTS ON PENDING AND IMPENDING
CASES (ABA RULE 2.10)
Rule 18-102.11. DISQUALIFICATION (ABA RULE 2.11)
Rule 18-102.12. SUPERVISORY DUTIES (ABA RULE 2.12)
Rule 18-102.13. ADMINISTRATIVE APPOINTMENTS (ABA RULE 2.13)
-9-
Rule 18-102.14.
Rule 18-102.15.
Rule 18-102.16.
DISABILITY AND IMPAIRMENT OF OTHERS (ABA RULE
2.14)
RESPONDING TO JUDICIAL AND ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT
(ABA RULE 2.15)
COOPERATION WITH DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITIES
(ABA RULE 2.16)
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.1.
EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL
(ABA RULE 3.1)
Rule 18-103.2. APPEARANCES BEFORE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES AND
CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS (ABA
RULE 3.2)
Rule 18-103.3. TESTIFYING AS A CHARACTER WITNESS (ABA RULE 3.3)
Rule 18-103.4. APPOINTMENT TO GOVERNMENTAL POSITIONS (ABA
RULE 3.4)
Rule 18-103.5. USE OF NONPUBLIC INFORMATION (ABA RULE 3.5)
Rule 18-103.6. AFFILIATION WITH DISCRIMINATORY ORGANIZATIONS
(ABA RULE 3.6)
Rule 18-103.7. PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS,
CHARITABLE, FRATERNAL, OR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS AND
ACTIVITIES (ABA RULE 3.7)
Rule 18-103.8. APPOINTMENTS TO FIDUCIARY POSITIONS (ABA RULE 3.8)
Rule 18-103.9. SERVICE AS ARBITRATOR OR MEDIATOR (ABA RULE 3.9)
Rule 18-103.10. PRACTICE OF LAW (ABA RULE 3.10)
Rule 18-103.11. FINANCIAL, BUSINESS, OR REMUNERATIVE ACTIVITIES
(ABA RULE 3.11)
Rule 18-103.12. COMPENSATION FOR EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES
(ABA RULE 3.12)
Rule 18-103.13. ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS, LOANS, BEQUESTS, BENEFITS,
OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE (ABA RULE 3.13)
Rule 18-103.14. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AND WAIVERS OF FEES OR
CHARGES (ABA RULE 3.14)
Rule 18-103.15. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (ABA RULE 3.15)
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.1.
Rule 18-104.2.
Rule 18-104.3.
Rule 18-104.4.
Rule 18-104.5.
Rule 18-104.6.
DEFINITIONS (ABA RULE 4.1)
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF JUDGE WHO IS NOT A CANDIDATE
(ABA RULE 4.2)
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF APPLICANT (ABA RULE 4.3)
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF CANDIDATE FOR ELECTION
(ABA RULE 4.4)
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF DISTRICT COURT CANDIDATE FOR
RETENTION (ABA RULE 4.5)
APPLICABILITY AND DISCIPLINE (ABA RULE 4.6)
-10-
CHAPTER 200 - MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, AND DEFINITIONS
Rule 18-200.1.
Rule 18-200.2.
Rule 18-200.3.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
SCOPE
DEFINITIONS
RULES GOVERNING INTEGRITY AND THE
AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-201.1.
Rule 18-201.2.
Rule 18-201.3.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW
PROMOTING CONFIDENCE IN THE JUDICIARY
AVOIDING LENDING THE PRESTIGE OF THE POSITION
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A
JUDICIAL APPOINTEE’S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.1. GIVING PRECEDENCE TO THE DUTIES OF POSITION
Rule 18-202.2. IMPARTIALITY AND FAIRNESS
Rule 18-202.3. BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND HARASSMENT
Rule 18-202.4. EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Rule 18-202.5. COMPETENCE, DILIGENCE, AND COOPERATION
Rule 18-206.6. ENSURING THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD
Rule 18-206.7. RESPONSIBILITY TO DECIDE
Rule 18-202.8. DECORUM AND DEMEANOR
Rule 18-202.9. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
Rule 18-202.10. STATEMENTS ON PENDING AND IMPENDING CASES
Rule 18-202.11. DISQUALIFICATION
Rule 18-202.12. SUPERVISORY DUTIES
Rule 18-202.13. ADMINISTRATIVE APPOINTMENTS
Rule 18-202.14. DISABILITY AND IMPAIRMENT OR OTHERS
Rule 18-202.15. RESPONDING TO JUDICIAL AND ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT
Rule 18-202.16. COOPERATION WITH DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITIES
RULES GOVERNING EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-203.1.
Rule 18-203.2.
Rule 18-203.3.
Rule 18-203.4.
Rule 18-203.5.
Rule 18-203.6.
EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL
APPEARANCES BEFORE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES AND
CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
TESTIFYING AS A CHARACTER WITNESS
APPOINTMENT TO GOVERNMENTAL POSITIONS
USE OF NONPUBLIC INFORMATION
AFFILIATION WITH DISCRIMINATORY ORGANIZATIONS
-11-
Rule 18-203.7.
PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS,
CHARITABLE, FRATERNAL, OR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS AND
ACTIVITIES
Rule 18-203.8. APPOINTMENTS TO FIDUCIARY POSITIONS
Rule 18-203.9. SERVICE AS ARBITRATOR OR MEDIATOR
Rule 18-203.10. PRACTICE OF LAW
Rule 18-203.11. FINANCIAL, BUSINESS, OR REMUNERATIVE ACTIVITIES
Rule 18-203.12. COMPENSATION FOR EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES
Rule 18-203.13. ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS, LOANS, BEQUESTS, BENEFITS,
OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE
Rule 18-203.14. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AND WAIVERS OF FEES OR
CHARGES
Rule 18-203.15. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-204.1.
Rule 18-204.2.
Rule 18-204.3.
Rule 18-204.4.
Rule 18-204.5.
DEFINITIONS
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF JUDICIAL APPOINTEE WHO IS
NOT A CANDIDATE
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF APPLICANT
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF CANDIDATE FOR ELECTION
APPLICABILITY AND DISCIPLINE
CHAPTER 300 - JUDICIAL ETHICS COMMITTEE
Rule 18-301.
Rule 18-302.
Rule 18-303.
Rule 18-304.
Rule 18-305.
Rule 18-306.
Rule 18-307.
Rule 18-308.
DEFINITIONS
EXISTENCE; MEMBERSHIP; TERMS
CHAIR; VICE CHAIR; STAFF
MEETINGS; QUORUM
DUTIES
REQUEST FOR OPINION
OPINION; LETTER OF ADVICE
PROTECTION FROM CHARGE OF VIOLATION
CHAPTER 400 - JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE
Rule 18-401.
Rule 18-402.
Rule 18-403.
Rule 18-404.
Rule 18-405.
Rule 18-406.
Rule 18-407.
Rule 18-408.
Rule 18-409.
Rule 18-410.
DEFINITIONS
COMMISSION
JUDICIAL INQUIRY BOARD
COMPLAINTS; INITIAL REVIEW BY INVESTIGATIVE COUNSEL
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
FURTHER INVESTIGATION
DISPOSITION WITHOUT PROCEEDINGS ON CHARGES
FILING OF CHARGES; PROCEEDINGS BEFORE COMMISSION
PROCEEDINGS IN COURT OF APPEALS
PUBLIC ACCESS
-12-
CHAPTER 500 - MARRIAGE CEREMONIES
Rule 18-501.
Rule 18-502.
Rule 18-503.
Rule 18-504.
SCOPE OF CHAPTER
SCHEDULING
CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
RESTRICTIONS
CHAPTER 600 - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Rule 18-601.
Rule 18-602.
Rule 18-603.
Rule 18-604.
JUDICIAL LEAVE
REPORTS BY CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT BY JUDGES
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT BY JUDICIAL
APPOINTEES
-13-
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 - MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, DEFINITIONS,
AND PREAMBLE OF THE CODE
Rule 18-100.1.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(a) Source and Structure of the Code
(b) Interpretive Provisions
(1) Discipline
(2) Accompanying Comments
(3) Rules of Reason
(4) Collateral Effect
(5) Judicial Ethics Committee Opinion
Rule 18-100.2.
SCOPE
Rule 18-100.3.
DEFINITIONS
(a) Domestic Partner
(b) Fiduciary
(c) Gift
(d) Impartial
(e) Impending Matter
(f) Independence
(g) Knowingly
(h) Member of Judge’s or Candidate’s Family
(i) Member of Judge’s or Candidate’s Household
(j) Pending Matter
(k) Significant Financial Interest
(l) Third Degree of Relationship
Rule 18-100.4.
PREAMBLE
(a) Importance of Independent, Fair, Competent, Impartial
Judiciary
(b) Dignity of Judicial Office
(c) Function of Code of Judicial Conduct
-14-
RULES GOVERNING JUDICIAL INTEGRITY AND
THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-101.1.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW (ABA RULE 1.1)
Rule 18-101.2.
PROMOTING CONFIDENCE IN THE JUDICIARY (ABA RULE
(1.2)
(a) Promoting Public Confidence
(b) Avoiding Perception of Impropriety
Rule 18-101.3.
AVOIDING LENDING THE PRESTIGE OF JUDICIAL OFFICE
(ABA RULE 1.3)
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.1.
GIVING PRECEDENCE TO THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL
OFFICE (ABA RULE 2.1)
Rule 18-102.2.
IMPARTIALITY AND FAIRNESS (ABA RULE 2.2)
Rule 18-102.3.
BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND HARASSMENT (ABA RULE 2.3)
Rule 18-102.4.
EXTERNAL INFLUENCE ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT (ABA RULE 2.4)
Rule 18-102.5.
COMPETENCE, DILIGENCE, AND COOPERATION (ABA RULE 2.5)
Rule 18-102.6.
ENSURING THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD (ABA RULE 2.6)
Rule 18-102.7.
RESPONSIBILITY TO DECIDE (ABA RULE 2.7)
Rule 18-102.8.
DECORUM, DEMEANOR, AND COMMUNICATION WITH JURORS
(ABA RULE 2.8)
Rule 18-102.9.
EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS (ABA RULE 2.9)
Rule 18-102.10.
JUDICIAL STATEMENTS ON PENDING AND IMPENDING
CASES (ABA RULE 2.10)
Rule 18-102.11.
DISQUALIFICATION (ABA RULE 2.11)
Rule 18-102.12.
SUPERVISORY DUTIES (ABA RULE 2.12)
Rule 18-102.13.
ADMINISTRATIVE APPOINTMENTS (ABA RULE 2.13)
Rule 18-102.14.
DISABILITY AND IMPAIRMENT OF OTHERS (ABA RULE
2.14)
-15-
Rule 18-102.15.
RESPONDING TO JUDICIAL AND ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT
(ABA RULE 2.15)
Rule 18-102.16.
COOPERATION WITH DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITIES
(ABA RULE 2.16)
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.1.
EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL
(ABA RULE 3.1)
Rule 18-103.2.
APPEARANCES BEFORE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES AND
CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS (ABA
RULE 3.2)
Rule 18-103.3.
TESTIFYING AS A CHARACTER WITNESS (ABA RULE 3.3)
Rule 18-103.4.
APPOINTMENT TO GOVERNMENTAL POSITIONS (ABA
RULE 3.4)
Rule 18-103.5.
USE OF NONPUBLIC INFORMATION (ABA RULE 3.5)
Rule 18-103.6.
AFFILIATION WITH DISCRIMINATORY ORGANIZATIONS
(ABA RULE 3.6)
Rule 18-103.7.
PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS,
CHARITABLE, FRATERNAL, OR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS AND
ACTIVITIES (ABA RULE 3.7)
Rule 18-103.8.
APPOINTMENTS TO FIDUCIARY POSITIONS (ABA RULE 3.8)
Rule 18-103.9.
SERVICE AS ARBITRATOR OR MEDIATOR (ABA RULE 3.9)
Rule 18-103.10.
PRACTICE OF LAW (ABA RULE 3.10)
(a) In General
(b) Exceptions
Rule 18-103.11.
FINANCIAL, BUSINESS, OR REMUNERATIVE ACTIVITIES
(ABA RULE 3.11)
Rule 18-103.12.
COMPENSATION FOR EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES
(ABA RULE 3.12)
Rule 18-103.13.
ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS, LOANS, BEQUESTS, BENEFITS,
OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE (ABA RULE 3.13)
-16-
Rule 18-103.14.
REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AND WAIVERS OF FEES OR
CHARGES (ABA RULE 3.14)
Rule 18-103.15.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (ABA RULE 3.15)
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.1.
DEFINITIONS (ABA RULE 4.1)
(a) Applicant
(b) Candidate
(c) Candidate for Election
(d) District Court Candidate for Retention
(e) Political Organization
Rule 18-104.2.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF JUDGE WHO IS NOT A CANDIDATE
(ABA RULE 4.2)
Rule 18-104.3.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF APPLICANT (ABA RULE 4.3)
Rule 18-104.4.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF CANDIDATE FOR ELECTION
(ABA RULE 4.4)
Rule 18-104.5.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF DISTRICT COURT CANDIDATE FOR
RETENTION (ABA RULE 4.5)
Rule 18-104.6.
APPLICABILITY AND DISCIPLINE (ABA RULE 4.6)
-17-
Rule 18-100.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, DEFINITIONS, AND PREAMBLE OF THE CODE
Rule 18-100.1.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(a) Source and Structure of the Code
The substantive provisions and much of the structure of
this Code are based in large part on the 2007 Model Code of
Judicial Conduct proposed by the American Bar Association (ABA
Model Code), although some of those provisions and some of the
style and organization of this Code differ from the ABA Model
Code.
Most of the differences are necessary for consistency with
the Maryland Constitution, Maryland statutes, and other Maryland
Rules.
Committee note: This Code is divided into five parts: an
introductory part consisting of Rules 18-100.1 through 18-100.4;
a part consisting of Rules 18-101.1 through 18-101.3 that deal
with judicial integrity and the avoidance of impropriety; a part
consisting of Rules 18-102.1 through 18-102.16 that deal with the
performance of judicial duties; a part consisting of Rules 18103.1 through 18-103.15 that deal generally with extrajudicial
activities; and a part consisting of Rules 18-104.1 through 18104.6 that deal with political activity.
This structure conforms generally to that of the ABA Model
Code but differs from the ABA Model Code in the following
principal respects:
(1) This Code assigns each Rule of Judicial Conduct a
Maryland Rule number but, so that the parallel will be obvious,
the Maryland Rule numbering conforms to that of the ABA Model
Code. Thus, for example, ABA Rule 1.1 (Compliance with the Law)
is Maryland Rule 18-101.1, which also is captioned “Compliance
with the Law.”
-18-
Rule 18-100.1
(2) This Code consolidates and reorganizes the
Preamble, Scope, Application, and Terminology provisions of the
ABA Model Code into Rules 18-100.1 through 18-100.4. Although
the Preamble is aspirational in nature, the Scope, Application,
and Terminology provisions are more substantive and should be in
the form of Rules.
(3) The 2007 ABA Code proposed a new and much different
structure and format. The enforceable ethical commands in
previous Codes were stated in the form of specific Canons, to
which were appended interpretative Comments. The enforceable
ethical commands in the 2007 ABA Code are stated in the form of
Rules that are supplemented by interpretative Comments and headed
by very brief and general statements denominated as Canons.
The 2007 ABA Code acknowledges that a judge may be
disciplined only for violating a Rule, but it regards the Canons
as providing guidance in interpreting the Rules. That guidance,
however, is more precisely the function of the Comments under
each Rule. The Canons themselves appear to be merely descriptive
of the subject matter of the Rules. To avoid any ambiguity over
the significance of the Canons and to make clear that attention
must be focused on the Rules and the Comments, this Code
eliminates the Canons and uses instead a descriptive statement of
the Rules in each part.
(4) The 2007 ABA Code contains provisions regarding
political activity and financial disclosure by judges. This Code
reorganizes those provisions and conforms them to the different
methods by which judges in Maryland are selected and retained and
to requirements enacted by the Maryland General Assembly or
adopted by the Court of Appeals. The intent is to make more
clear to each judge and candidate for judicial office what is
allowed and what is not allowed.
(b) Interpretive Provisions
(1) Discipline
(A) A judge may be disciplined only for violating a Rule.
If a Rule contains a permissive term, such as "may" or "should"
the conduct being addressed is committed to the personal and
professional discretion of the judge or candidate in question,
and no disciplinary action should be taken for action or inaction
within the bounds of that discretion.
-19-
Rule 18-100.1
(B) Although the text of the Rules is binding and
enforceable, it is not contemplated that every transgression will
result in the imposition of discipline.
Whether discipline
should be imposed should be determined through a reasonable and
reasoned application of the Rules and should depend upon factors
such as the seriousness of the transgression, the facts and
circumstances at the time of the transgression, the extent of any
pattern of improper activity, whether there have been previous
violations, and the effect of the improper activity upon the
judicial system or others.
(2) Accompanying Comments
(A) The Comments that accompany the Rules contain
explanatory material and, in some instances, provide examples of
permitted or prohibited conduct.
(B) Comments neither add to nor subtract from the binding
obligations set forth in the Rules.
Therefore, when a Comment
contains the term "must," it does not mean that the Comment
itself is binding or enforceable but merely signifies that the
Rule in question, properly understood, is obligatory as to the
conduct at issue.
(C) The Comments also may identify aspirational goals for
judges.
To implement fully the principles of this Code, judges
should hold themselves to the highest ethical standards and seek
to achieve those aspirational goals, thereby enhancing the
dignity of the judicial office.
(3) Rules of Reason
-20-
Rule 18-100.1
The Rules in this Code are rules of reason that should be
applied in a manner that is consistent with Constitutional
requirements, statutes, other Court Rules, and decisional law and
that gives due regard for all relevant circumstances.
The Rules
should not be interpreted to impinge upon the essential
independence of judges in making judicial decisions.
(4) Collateral Effect
This Code is not designed or intended as a basis for
civil or criminal liability.
It is also not intended to be the
basis for litigants to seek collateral remedies against each
other or to obtain tactical advantages in proceedings before a
court.
(5) Judicial Ethics Committee Opinion
In interpreting this Code, attention should be given to
the opinions of the Judicial Ethics Committee and, if
appropriate, that Committee should be asked for a written letter
of advice or a binding opinion.
Cross reference: See Rule 18-308, protecting a judge from a
charge of violating an ethics provision in this Code if the judge
has requested and received an opinion or advice letter from the
Committee and is in compliance with that opinion or advice letter
or is in compliance with a published opinion of the Committee.
Source: This Rule is new but is derived from paragraphs A-101
through A-108 of former Rule 16-813 (2016).
-21-
Rule 18-100.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, DEFINITIONS, AND PREAMBLE OF THE CODE
Rule 18-100.2.
SCOPE
The Rules in this Chapter apply to:
(a) Incumbent judges of the Court of Appeals, the Court of
Special Appeals, the Circuit Courts, and the District Court;
(b) Except as otherwise expressly provided in specific Rules,
incumbent judges of the Orphans' Courts;
(c) Except as otherwise expressly provided in specific Rules,
retired judges who are approved for recall for temporary service
pursuant to Code, Courts Article, §1-302; and
(d) Candidates and applicants for judicial office as defined in
Rule 18-104.1, to the extent that a Rule expressly applies to
such candidates or applicants.
Source: This Rule is derived from paragraph A-109 of former Rule
16-813 (2016).
-22-
Rule 18-100.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, DEFINITIONS, AND PREAMBLE OF THE CODE
Rule 18-100.3.
DEFINITIONS
In the Rules in this Chapter, the following definitions
apply except as otherwise expressly provided or as necessary
implication requires:
(a)
Domestic Partner
"Domestic partner" means an individual with whom another
individual maintains a household and an intimate relationship,
other than an individual to whom he or she is legally married.
(b)
Fiduciary
"Fiduciary" includes relationships such as administrator,
attorney-in-fact by power of attorney, personal representative,
and trustee.
(c)
Gift
(1)
Except as provided in subsection (c)(2) of this Rule,
"gift" means the transfer of anything of economic value,
regardless of form, without adequate and lawful consideration.
(2)
"Gift" does not include the solicitation, acceptance,
receipt, or regulation of a political contribution that is
regulated in accordance with:
(A) the Election Law Article of the Maryland Code; or
(B) any other Maryland law regulating the conduct of
-23-
Rule 18-100.3
elections or the receipt of political contributions.
(d)
Impartial
"Impartial," "impartiality," and "impartially" mean
absence of bias or prejudice in favor of, or against, particular
parties or classes of parties, as well as maintenance of an open
mind in considering issues that may come before a judge.
(e)
Impending Matter
"Impending matter" means a matter that is imminent or
expected to occur in the near future.
(f)
Independence
"Independence" means a judge's freedom from influence or
controls other than those established by law.
(g)
Knowingly
"Knowingly," "knowledge," "known," and "knows" mean actual
knowledge of the fact in question.
An individual’s knowledge may
be inferred from circumstances.
(h)
Member of Judge's or Candidate's Family
"Member of a [judge's] [candidate's] family" means a
spouse, domestic partner, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent,
or other relative or individual with whom the judge or candidate
maintains a close familial relationship.
(i)
Member of Judge's or Candidate's Household
"Member of [judge's] [candidate's] household" means:
(1) if sharing the judge's or candidate's legal residence,
the judge's or candidate's spouse, domestic partner, child, ward,
financially dependent parent, or other financially dependent
-24-
Rule 18-100.3
relative; or
(2) the judge's or candidate's spouse, child, ward, parent,
or other relative, over whose financial affairs the judge or
candidate has legal or actual control.
(j)
Pending Matter
"Pending matter" means a matter that has commenced.
A
matter continues to be pending through any appellate process
until final disposition.
(k)
Significant Financial Interest
(1) "Significant financial interest" means ownership of:
(A) an interest as the result of which the owner has
received within the past three years, is currently receiving, or
in the future is entitled to receive, more than $1,000 per year;
(B) more than 3% of a business entity; or
(C) a security of any kind that represents, or is
convertible into, more than 3% of a business entity.
(2) In applying this definition:
(A) ownership of an interest in a mutual or common
investment fund that holds a security is not ownership of the
security unless:
(i) the judge participates in the management of the fund;
or
(ii) there is before the judge a pending matter or an
impending matter that could substantially affect the value of the
interest;
(B) ownership of a government security is not a significant
-25-
Rule 18-100.3
financial interest in the issuer unless there is before the judge
a pending matter or an impending matter that could substantially
affect the value of the security;
(C) neither a deposit in a financial institution nor a
proprietary interest such as or similar to that of a depositor in
a mutual savings association, member of a credit union, or policy
holder in a mutual insurance company is a significant financial
interest in the entity unless there is before the judge a pending
matter or an impending matter that could substantially affect the
value of the deposit or interest; and
(D) an ownership interest in a security held by a
charitable, civic, educational, fraternal, sororal, or religious
organization will not be imputed to a judge merely because the
judge or the judge's child, parent, or spouse is an adviser to or
director or officer of, or otherwise actively participates in,
the organization.
(l)
Third Degree of Relationship
"Third degree of relationship" includes the following
individuals:
great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, uncle,
aunt, brother, sister, child, grandchild, great- grandchild,
nephew, and niece.
Source: This Rule is derived from paragraphs B-101 through B-112
of former Rule 16-813 (2016).
-26-
Rule 18-100.4
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, DEFINITIONS, AND PREAMBLE OF THE CODE
Rule 18-100.4.
PREAMBLE
(a) Importance of Independent, Fair, Competent, Impartial
Judiciary
An independent, fair, competent, and impartial judiciary
composed of men and women of integrity who will interpret and
apply the law that governs our society is indispensable to our
system of justice.
Thus, the judiciary plays a central role in
preserving the principles of justice and the rule of law.
Inherent in all the Rules contained in this Code are the precepts
that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and
honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to
maintain and enhance confidence in the legal system.
(b) Dignity of Judicial Office
Judges should maintain the dignity of judicial office at
all times, and avoid both impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety in their professional and personal lives.
They
should aspire at all times to conduct that ensures the greatest
possible public confidence in their independence, impartiality,
integrity, and competence.
(c) Function of Code of Judicial Conduct
This Code of Judicial Conduct establishes standards for the
-27-
Rule 18-100.4
ethical conduct of judges and judicial candidates.
It is not
intended as an exhaustive guide for the conduct of judges and
judicial candidates, who are governed in their judicial and
personal conduct by general ethical standards as well as by this
Code.
This Code is intended, however, to provide guidance and
assist judges in maintaining the highest standards of judicial
and personal conduct, and to provide a basis for regulating their
conduct through disciplinary agencies.
Source: This Rule is derived from paragraphs C-101 through C-103
of former Rule 16-813 (2016).
-28-
Rule 18-101.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING JUDICIAL INTEGRITY AND
THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-101.1.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW (ABA RULE 1.1)
A judge shall comply with the law, including this Code of
Judicial Conduct.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 1.1 of Rule 16-813
(2016).
-29-
Rule 18-101.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING JUDICIAL INTEGRITY AND
THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-101.2.
PROMOTING CONFIDENCE IN THE JUDICIARY (ABA RULE 1.2)
(a) Promoting Public Confidence
A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes
public confidence in the independence, integrity, and
impartiality of the judiciary.
(b) Avoiding Perception of Impropriety
A judge shall avoid conduct that would create in reasonable
minds a perception of impropriety.
COMMENT
[1] Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by
improper conduct and conduct that creates the appearance of
impropriety. This principle applies to both the professional and
personal conduct of a judge.
[2] A judge should expect to be the subject of public
scrutiny that might be viewed as burdensome if applied to other
individuals and must accept the restrictions imposed by this
Code.
[3] Conduct that compromises or appears to compromise the
independence, integrity, and impartiality of a judge undermines
public confidence in the judiciary. Because it is not
practicable to list all such conduct, the Rule is necessarily
cast in general terms.
[4] Judges should participate in activities that promote
ethical conduct among judges and attorneys, support
professionalism within the judiciary and the legal profession,
and promote access to justice for all.
-30-
Rule 18-101.2
[5] Actual improprieties include violations of law, court
rules, and this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is
whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception
that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities
with competence, impartiality, and integrity is impaired.
[6] A judge should initiate and participate in community
outreach activities for the purpose of promoting public
understanding of and confidence in the administration of justice.
In conducting such activities, the judge must act in a manner
consistent with this Code.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 1.2 of Rule 16-813
-31-
Rule 18-101.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING JUDICIAL INTEGRITY AND
THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-101.3.
AVOIDING LENDING THE PRESTIGE OF JUDICIAL OFFICE
(ABA RULE 1.3)
A judge shall not lend the prestige of judicial office to
advance the personal or economic interests of the judge or
others, or allow others to do so.
COMMENT
[1] It is improper for a judge to use or attempt to use his
or her position to gain personal advantage or deferential
treatment of any kind. For example, it would be improper for a
judge to allude to his or her judicial status to gain favorable
treatment in encounters with traffic officials. Similarly, a
judge must not use a judicial letterhead to gain an advantage in
conducting his or her personal business.
[2] A judge may provide a reference or recommendation for
an individual based upon the judge's personal knowledge. The
judge may use an official letterhead if the judge indicates that
the reference is personal and if there is no likelihood that the
use of the letterhead would reasonably be perceived as an attempt
to exert pressure by reason of the judicial office.
[3] Judges may participate in the process of judicial
selection by cooperating with appointing authorities and
screening committees and by responding to inquiries from such
entities concerning the professional qualifications of an
individual being considered for judicial office.
Cross reference:
See Rule 18-104.3.
[4] Special considerations arise when judges write or
contribute to publications of for-profit entities, whether
related or unrelated to the law. A judge should not permit
anyone associated with the publication of such materials to
-32-
Rule 18-101.3
exploit the judge's office in a manner that violates this Rule or
other applicable law. In contracts for publication of a judge's
writing, the judge should retain sufficient control over the
advertising to avoid such exploitation.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 1.3 of Rule 16-813
-33-
Rule 18-102.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.1.
GIVING PRECEDENCE TO THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL
OFFICE (ABA RULE 2.1)
The duties of judicial office, as prescribed by law, shall
take precedence over a judge's personal and extrajudicial
activities.
COMMENT
[1] To ensure that judges are available to fulfill their
judicial duties, judges must conduct their personal and
extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflicts that
would result in frequent disqualification.
[2] Although it is not a duty of judicial office unless
prescribed by law, judges are encouraged to participate in
activities that promote public understanding of and confidence in
the justice system.
[3] With respect to time devoted to personal and
extrajudicial activities, this Rule must be construed in a
reasonable manner. Family obligations, illnesses, emergencies,
and permissible extrajudicial activities may require a judge's
immediate attention. Attending to those obligations and
situations, temporary in nature, is not prohibited by this Rule
and should be dealt with in accordance with applicable vacation,
sick leave, and administrative leave policies.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.1 of Rule 16-813
-34-
Rule 18-102.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.2.
IMPARTIALITY AND FAIRNESS (ABA RULE 2.2)
(a) A judge shall uphold and apply the law and shall perform
all duties of judicial office impartially and fairly.
(b) A judge may make reasonable efforts, consistent with the
Maryland Rules and other law, to facilitate the ability of all
litigants, including self-represented litigants, to be fairly
heard.
COMMENT
[1] To ensure impartiality and fairness to all parties, a
judge must be objective and open-minded.
[2] Although each judge comes to the bench with a unique
background and personal philosophy, a judge must interpret and
apply the law without regard to whether the judge approves or
disapproves of the law in question.
[3] When applying and interpreting the law, a judge
sometimes may make good-faith errors of fact or law. Errors of
this kind do not violate this Rule.
Cross reference:
See Rule 18-102.6 Comment [2].
Source: This Rule is derived in part from former Rule 2.2 of
Rule 16-813 (2016) and is in part new.
-35-
Rule 18-102.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.3.
(a)
BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND HARASSMENT (ABA RULE 2.3)
A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office,
including administrative duties, without bias or prejudice.
(b)
In the performance of judicial duties, a judge shall not,
by words or conduct, manifest bias, prejudice, or harassment
based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin,
ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status,
socioeconomic status, or political affiliation.
A judge shall
require attorneys in proceedings before the court, court staff,
court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and
control to refrain from similar conduct.
(c)
The restrictions of section (b) of this Rule do not
preclude judges or attorneys from making legitimate references to
the listed factors, or similar factors, when they are relevant to
an issue in a proceeding.
COMMENT
[1] A judge who manifests bias or prejudice in a proceeding
impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings the judiciary
into disrepute.
[2] A judge must avoid conduct that may reasonably be
perceived as prejudiced or biased. Examples of manifestations of
bias or prejudice include epithets; slurs; demeaning nicknames;
negative stereotyping; attempted humor based upon stereotypes;
threatening, intimidating, or hostile acts; suggestions of
-36-
Rule 18-102.3
connections between race, ethnicity, or nationality and crime;
and irrelevant references to personal characteristics. Even
facial expressions and body language can convey to parties and
attorneys in the proceeding, jurors, the media, and others an
appearance of bias or prejudice.
[3] Harassment, as referred to in section (b) of this Rule,
is verbal or physical conduct that denigrates or shows hostility
or aversion toward an individual on bases such as race, sex,
gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age,
sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or
political affiliation.
[4] Sexual harassment includes sexual advances, requests
for sexual favors, conduct of a sexual nature through the use of
electronic communication that alarms or seriously annoys another,
and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is
unwelcome.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.3 of Rule 16-813
-37-
Rule 18-102.4
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.4.
(a)
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT (ABA RULE 2.4)
A judge shall not be swayed by public clamor or fear of
criticism.
(b)
A judge shall not permit family, social, political,
financial, or other interests or relationships to influence the
judge's judicial conduct or judgment.
(c)
A judge shall not convey or permit others to convey the
impression that any person is in a position to influence the
judge.
COMMENT
[1] An independent judiciary requires that judges decide
cases according to the law and facts, without regard to whether
particular laws or litigants are popular or unpopular with the
public, the media, government officials, or the judge's friends
or family. Confidence in the judiciary is eroded if judicial
decision-making is perceived to be subject to inappropriate
outside influences.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.4 of Rule 16-813
-38-
Rule 18-102.5
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.5.
(a)
COMPETENCE, DILIGENCE, AND COOPERATION (ABA RULE 2.5)
A judge shall perform judicial and administrative duties
competently, diligently, promptly, and without favoritism or
nepotism.
(b)
A judge shall cooperate with other judges and court
officials in the administration of court business.
(c)
A judge shall not wilfully fail to comply with
administrative rules or reasonable directives of a judge with
supervisory authority.
COMMENT
[1] Competence in the performance of judicial duties
requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and
preparation reasonably necessary to perform a judge's
responsibilities of judicial office.
[2] A judge should seek the necessary docket time, court
staff, expertise, and resources to discharge all adjudicative and
administrative responsibilities.
[3] Prompt disposition of the court's business requires a
judge to devote adequate time to judicial duties, to be punctual
in attending court and expeditious in determining matters under
submission, and to take reasonable measures to ensure that court
officials, litigants, and their attorneys cooperate with the
judge to that end.
[4] In disposing of matters promptly and efficiently, a
judge must demonstrate due regard for the rights of parties to be
heard and to have issues resolved without unnecessary cost or
delay. A judge should monitor and supervise cases in ways that
reduce or eliminate dilatory practices, avoidable delays, and
-39-
Rule 18-102.5
unnecessary costs.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.5 of Rule 16-813
-40-
Rule 18-102.6
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.6.
(a)
ENSURING THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD (ABA RULE 2.6)
A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal
interest in a proceeding, or that person's attorney, the right to
be heard according to law.
(b)
A judge may encourage parties to a proceeding and their
attorneys to settle matters in dispute but shall not act in a
manner that coerces any party into settlement.
COMMENT
[1] The right to be heard is an essential component of a
fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive rights of
litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the
right to be heard are observed.
[2] Increasingly, judges have before them self-represented
litigants whose lack of knowledge about the law and about
judicial procedures and requirements may inhibit their ability to
be heard effectively. A judge's obligation under Rule 18-102.2
to remain fair and impartial does not preclude the judge from
making reasonable accommodations to protect a self-represented
litigant's right to be heard, so long as those accommodations do
not give the self-represented litigant an unfair advantage. This
Rule does not require a judge to make any particular
accommodation.
[3] Settlement conferences and referrals to alternative
dispute resolution may play an important role in the
administration of justice. The judge plays an important role in
overseeing the settlement of disputes, but should be careful that
efforts to further settlement do not undermine any party's right
to be heard according to law. Among the factors that a judge
should consider when deciding upon an appropriate settlement
practice for a case are (a) whether the parties have requested or
voluntarily consented to a certain level of participation by the
-41-
Rule 18-102.6
judge in settlement discussions, (b) whether the parties and
their attorneys are relatively sophisticated in legal matters,
(c) whether the case will be tried by the judge or a jury, (d)
whether the parties participate with their attorneys in
settlement discussions, (e) whether any parties are
self-represented, and (f) the nature of the proceeding.
[4] Judges must be mindful of the effect settlement
discussions can have, not only on their objectivity and
impartiality, but also on the appearance of their objectivity and
impartiality. A judge should keep in mind the effect that the
judge's participation in settlement discussions may have on both
the judge's own views of the case and the perceptions of the
attorneys and the parties if the case remains with the judge
after settlement efforts are unsuccessful. Despite a judge's
best efforts, there may be instances when information obtained
during settlement discussions could influence a judge's decisionmaking during trial, and, in such instances, the judge should
consider whether disqualification may be appropriate. See Rule
18-102.11 (a)(1).
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.6 of Rule 16-813
(2016).
-42-
Rule 18-102.7
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.7.
RESPONSIBILITY TO DECIDE (ABA RULE 2.7)
A judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the judge
unless recusal is appropriate.
COMMENT
[1] Although there are times when disqualification is
necessary or appropriate to protect the rights of litigants and
preserve public confidence in the independence, integrity, and
impartiality of the judiciary, judges must be available to decide
matters that come before the courts. The dignity of the court,
the judge's respect for fulfillment of judicial duties, and a
proper concern for the burdens that may be imposed upon the
judge's colleagues require that a judge not use disqualification
to avoid cases that present difficult, controversial, or
unpopular issues.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.7 of Rule 16-813
-43-
Rule 18-102.8
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.8.
DECORUM, DEMEANOR, AND COMMUNICATION WITH JURORS
(ABA RULE 2.8)
(a)
A judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings
before the court.
(b)
A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to
litigants, jurors, witnesses, attorneys, court staff, court
officials, and others with whom the judge deals in an official
capacity, and shall require similar conduct of attorneys, court
staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's
direction and control.
(c)
A judge shall not commend or criticize jurors for their
verdict other than in a court order or opinion in a proceeding.
COMMENT
[1] The duty to hear all proceedings with patience and
courtesy is not inconsistent with the duty imposed in Rule 18102.5 to dispose promptly of the business of the court. Judges
can be efficient and businesslike while being patient and
deliberate.
[2] Commending or criticizing jurors for their verdict may
imply a judicial expectation in future cases and may impair a
juror's ability to be fair and impartial in a subsequent case.
[3] A judge who is not otherwise prohibited by law from
doing so may meet with jurors who choose to remain after trial
but should be careful not to discuss the merits of the case.
-44-
Rule 18-102.8
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.8 of Rule 16-813
-45-
Rule 18-102.9
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.9.
(a)
EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS (ABA RULE 2.9)
A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte
communications, or consider other communications made to the
judge out of the presence of the parties or their attorneys,
concerning a pending or impending matter, except as follows:
(1) A judge may initiate, permit, or consider any ex parte
communication when expressly authorized by law to do so.
(2) When circumstances require, ex parte communication for
scheduling, administrative, or emergency purposes, which does not
address substantive matters, is permitted, provided:
(A) the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a
procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage as a result of the
ex parte communication; and
(B) the judge makes provision promptly to notify all other
parties of the substance of the ex parte communication, and gives
the parties an opportunity to respond.
(3)
A judge may obtain the advice of a disinterested expert
on the law applicable to a proceeding if the judge (A) makes
provision promptly to notify all of the parties as to the expert
consulted and the substance of the advice, and (B) affords the
parties a reasonable opportunity to respond.
-46-
Rule 18-102.9
(4)
A judge may consult with court staff and court officials
whose functions are to aid the judge in carrying out the judge's
adjudicative responsibilities, or with other judges, provided the
judge does not decide a case based on adjudicative facts that are
not made part of the record, and does not abrogate the
responsibility personally to decide the matter.
Cross reference: See Comment [1] to Rule 18-103.9, permitting a
judge to engage in prehearing and settlement conferences.
(5)
With the consent of the parties, a judge may confer
separately with the parties and their attorneys as part of a
prehearing or settlement conference conducted pursuant to the
Rules in Title 17.
(6)
When serving in a problem-solving court program of a
Circuit Court or the District Court pursuant to Rule 16-207, a
judge may initiate, permit, and consider ex parte communications
in conformance with the established protocols for the operation
of the program if the parties have expressly consented to those
protocols.
(b)
If a judge inadvertently receives an unauthorized ex parte
communication bearing upon the substance of a matter, the judge
shall make provision promptly to notify the parties of the
substance of the communication and provide the parties with an
opportunity to respond.
(c)
A judge shall not investigate adjudicative facts in a
matter independently, and shall consider only the evidence in the
record and any facts that may properly be judicially noticed.
-47-
Rule 18-102.9
(d)
A judge shall make reasonable efforts, including providing
appropriate supervision, to ensure that this Rule is not violated
by court staff, court officials, and others subject to the
judge's direction and control.
COMMENT
[1] To the extent reasonably possible, all parties or their
attorneys shall be included in communications with a judge.
[2] Whenever the presence of a party or notice to a party
is required by this Rule, it is the party's attorney, or if the
party is self-represented, the party, who is to be present or to
whom notice is to be given.
[3] The proscription against communications concerning a
proceeding includes communications with attorneys, law teachers,
and other persons who are not participants in the proceeding,
except to the limited extent permitted by this Rule.
[4] A judge may consult with other judges on pending
matters, including a retired judge approved for recall, but must
avoid ex parte discussions of a case with judges who have
previously been disqualified from hearing the matter, and with
judges who have appellate jurisdiction over the matter.
[5] The prohibition against a judge investigating
adjudicative facts in a matter extends to information available
in all mediums, including electronic.
[6] A judge may consult ethics advisory committees, outside
counsel, or legal experts concerning the judge's compliance with
this Code. Such consultations are not subject to the
restrictions of subsection (a)(2) of this Rule.
Committee note: This Rule does not regulate judicial notice of
so-called “legislative facts” (facts pertaining to social policy
and their ramifications) or of law.
Cross reference: See Rule 5-201.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.9 of Rule 16-813
-48-
Rule 18-102.10
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.10.
JUDICIAL STATEMENTS ON PENDING AND IMPENDING
CASES (ABA RULE 2.10)
(a)
A judge shall abstain from public comment that relates to
a proceeding pending or impending in any court and that might
reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the
fairness of that proceeding and shall require similar abstention
on the part of court personnel subject to the judge's direction
and control.
This Rule does not prohibit a judge from making
public statements in the course of official duties or from
explaining for public information the procedures of the court.
(b)
With respect to a case, controversy, or issue that is
likely to come before the court, a judge shall not make a
commitment, pledge, or promise that is inconsistent with the
impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of the office.
(c)
Notwithstanding the restrictions in sections (a) and (b)
of this Rule, a judge may make public statements in the course of
official duties, may explain court procedures, and may comment on
any proceeding in which the judge is a litigant in a non-judicial
capacity.
COMMENT
[1]
This Rule's restrictions on judicial speech are
-49-
Rule 18-102.10
essential to the maintenance of the independence, integrity, and
impartiality of the judiciary.
[2] This Rule does not prohibit a judge from commenting on
proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal
capacity. In cases in which the judge is a litigant in an
official capacity, such as a writ of mandamus, the judge must not
comment publicly.
[3] "Court personnel," as used in section (a) of this Rule
does not include the attorneys in a proceeding before the judge.
The comment of attorneys in this regard is governed by Rule 19303.6 of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.10 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-50-
Rule 18-102.11
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.11.
(a)
DISQUALIFICATION (ABA RULE 2.11)
A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any
proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be
questioned, including the following circumstances:
(1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a
party or a party's attorney, or personal knowledge of facts that
are in dispute in the proceeding.
(2) The judge knows that the judge, the judge's spouse or
domestic partner, an individual within the third degree of
relationship to either of them, or the spouse or domestic partner
of such an individual:
(A) is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director,
general partner, managing member, or trustee of a party;
(B) is acting as an attorney in the proceeding;
(C) is an individual who has more than a de minimis
interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding;
or
(D) is likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.
(3) The judge knows that he or she, individually or as a
fiduciary, or any of the following individuals has a significant
financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a
-51-
Rule 18-102.11
party to the proceeding:
(A) the judge's spouse or domestic partner;
(B) an individual within the third degree of relationship
to the judge; or
(C) any other member of the judge's family residing in the
judge's household.
(4) The judge, while a judge or a judicial candidate, has
made a public statement, other than in a court proceeding,
judicial decision, or opinion, that commits or appears to commit
the judge to reach a particular result or rule in a particular
way in the proceeding or controversy.
(5) The judge:
(A) served as an attorney in the matter in controversy, or
was associated with an attorney who participated substantially as
an attorney in the matter during such association;
(B) served in governmental employment, and in such capacity
participated personally and substantially as an attorney or
public official concerning the proceeding, or has publicly
expressed in such capacity an opinion concerning the merits of
the particular matter in controversy;
(C) previously presided as a judge over the matter in
another court; or
(D) is a retired judge who is subject to disqualification
under Rule 18-103.9.
Cross reference: See Code, Courts Article, §1-203 (c) prohibiting
a judge from hearing a case in which a partner or employee of the
judge’s former law firm is an attorney of record during a period
-52-
Rule 18-102.11
in which the judge is receiving a payout of his former interest
in the firm.
(b)
A judge shall keep informed about the judge's personal and
fiduciary economic interests and make a reasonable effort to keep
informed about the personal economic interests of the judge's
spouse and minor children residing in the judge's household.
(c)
A judge subject to disqualification under this Rule, other
than for bias or prejudice under subsection (a)(1) of this Rule,
may disclose on the record the basis of the judge's
disqualification and may ask the parties and their attorneys to
consider, outside the presence of the judge and court personnel,
whether to waive disqualification.
If, following the disclosure,
the parties and attorneys agree, without participation by the
judge or court personnel, that the judge should not be
disqualified, the judge may participate in the proceeding.
The
agreement shall be incorporated into the record of the
proceeding.
COMMENT
[1] Under this Rule, a judge is disqualified whenever the
judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, regardless
of whether any of the specific provisions of subsections (a)(1)
through (5) apply. In this Rule, "disqualification" has the same
meaning as "recusal."
[2] A judge's obligation not to hear or decide matters in
which disqualification is required applies regardless of whether
a motion to disqualify is filed.
[3] By decisional law, the rule of necessity may override
the rule of recusal. For example, a judge might be required to
participate in judicial review of a judicial salary statute or
might be the only judge available in a matter requiring immediate
judicial action, such as a hearing on probable cause or a
temporary restraining order. When the rule of necessity does
-53-
Rule 18-102.11
override the rule of recusal, the judge must disclose on the
record the basis for possible disqualification and, if
practicable, use reasonable efforts to transfer the matter to
another judge.
[4] A judge should disclose on the record information that
the judge believes the parties or their attorneys might
reasonably consider relevant to a possible motion for
disqualification, even if the judge believes there is no basis
for disqualification.
[5] This procedure gives the parties an opportunity to
waive the recusal if the judge agrees. The judge may comment on
possible waiver but must ensure that consideration of the
question of waiver is made independently of the judge. A party
may act through an attorney if the attorney represents on the
record that the party has been consulted and consents. As a
practical matter, a judge may request that all parties and their
attorneys sign a waiver agreement.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.11 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-54-
Rule 18-102.12
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.12.
(a)
SUPERVISORY DUTIES (ABA RULE 2.12)
A judge shall require court staff, court officials, and
others subject to the judge's direction and control to act in a
manner consistent with the judge's obligations under this Code.
(b)
A judge with supervisory authority for the performance of
other judges shall take reasonable measures to ensure that those
judges properly discharge their judicial responsibilities,
including the prompt disposition of matters before them.
COMMENT
[1] A judge is responsible for his or her own conduct and
for the conduct of others, such as staff, when those individuals
are acting at the judge's direction or control. A judge may not
direct court personnel to engage in conduct on the judge's behalf
or as the judge's representative when such conduct would violate
this Code if undertaken by the judge.
[2] Public confidence in the judicial system depends upon
timely justice. To promote the efficient administration of
justice, a judge with supervisory authority must take the steps
needed to ensure that judges under his or her supervision
administer their workloads promptly.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.12 of Rule 16-813
(2016).
-55-
Rule 18-102.13
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.13.
(a)
ADMINISTRATIVE APPOINTMENTS (ABA RULE 2.13)
In making administrative appointments, a judge:
(1) shall exercise the power of appointment impartially and
on the basis of merit; and
(2) shall avoid nepotism, favoritism, and unnecessary
appointments.
(b)
A judge shall not approve compensation of appointees
beyond the fair value of services rendered.
COMMENT
[1] Appointees of a judge include assigned attorneys,
officials such as commissioners, special magistrates, receivers,
and guardians, and personnel such as clerks, secretaries, and
bailiffs. Consent by the parties to an appointment or an award
of compensation does not relieve the judge of the obligation
prescribed by section (a) of this Rule.
[2] Unless otherwise defined by law, nepotism is the
appointment or hiring of any relative within the third degree of
relationship to either the judge or the judge's spouse or
domestic partner, or the spouse or domestic partner of such
relative.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.13 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-56-
Rule 18-102.14
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.14.
DISABILITY AND IMPAIRMENT OF OTHERS (ABA RULE
2.14)
A judge having a reasonable belief that the performance of
an attorney or another judge is impaired by drugs or alcohol or
by a mental, emotional, or physical condition, shall take
appropriate action, which may include a confidential referral to
an attorney or judicial assistance program.
COMMENT
[1] "Appropriate action" means action intended and
reasonably likely to help the judge or attorney in question to
address the problem and prevent harm to the justice system.
Depending upon the circumstances, appropriate action may include
speaking directly to the impaired individual, notifying an
individual with supervisory responsibility over the impaired
individual, or making a referral to an assistance program.
[2] Taking or initiating corrective action by way of
referral to an assistance program may satisfy a judge's
responsibility under this Rule. Assistance programs have many
approaches for offering help to impaired judges and attorneys,
such as intervention, counseling, or referral to appropriate
health care professionals. Depending upon the gravity of the
conduct that has come to the judge's attention, however, the
judge may be required to take other action, such as reporting the
impaired judge or attorney to the appropriate authority, agency,
or body. See Rule 18-102.15.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.14 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-57-
Rule 18-102.15
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.15.
RESPONDING TO JUDICIAL AND ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT
(ABA RULE 2.15)
(a)
A judge shall take or initiate appropriate corrective
measures with respect to the unprofessional conduct of another
judge or an attorney.
(b)
If other corrective measures are not appropriate or, if
attempted, were not successful, a judge shall inform the
Commission on Judicial Disabilities of facts known to that judge
that raise a substantial question as to another judge's fitness
for office.
(c)
If other corrective measures are not appropriate or, if
attempted, were not successful, a judge shall inform the Attorney
Grievance Commission of facts known to the judge that raise a
substantial question as to an attorney’s honesty,
trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney in other respects.
(d)
Acts of a judge required or permitted by sections (a),
(b), and (c) of this Rule shall be absolutely privileged.
COMMENT
[1] Permitting a judge to take "corrective" measures gives
the judge a wide range of options to deal with unprofessional
conduct. Appropriate corrective measures may include direct
communication with the judge or attorney who is believed to have
-58-
Rule 18-102.15
committed the violation or other direct action if available.
There may be instances of professional misconduct that would
warrant a private admonition or referral to a bar association
counseling service.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.15 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-59-
Rule 18-102.16
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES
Rule 18-102.16.
COOPERATION WITH DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITIES
(ABA RULE 2.16)
(a)
A judge shall cooperate and be candid and honest with
judicial and attorney disciplinary agencies.
(b)
A judge shall not retaliate, directly or indirectly,
against a person known or suspected to have assisted or
cooperated with an investigation of a judge or an attorney.
COMMENT
[1] Cooperation with investigations and proceedings of
judicial and attorney discipline agencies, as required in section
(a) of this Rule, instills confidence in judges' commitment to
the integrity of the judicial system and the protection of the
public.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.16 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-60-
Rule 18-103.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.1. EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL (ABA RULE
3.1)
Except as prohibited by law or this Code, a judge may engage
in extrajudicial activities.
When engaging in extrajudicial
activities, a judge shall not:
(a) participate in activities that will interfere with the
proper performance of the judge's judicial duties;
(b) participate in activities that will lead to frequent
disqualification of the judge;
(c) participate in activities that would appear to a reasonable
person to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or
impartiality;
(d) engage in conduct that would appear to a reasonable person
to be coercive; or
(e) make inappropriate use of court premises, staff,
stationery, equipment, or other resources.
COMMENT
[1] To the extent that time permits, and judicial
independence and impartiality are not compromised, judges are
encouraged to engage in appropriate extrajudicial activities.
Judges are uniquely qualified to engage in extrajudicial
activities that concern the law, the legal system, and the
administration of justice, such as by speaking, writing,
teaching, or participating in scholarly research projects. In
addition, judges are permitted and encouraged to engage in
-61-
Rule 18-103.1
educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic
extrajudicial activities not conducted for profit, even when the
activities do not involve the law. See Rule 18-103.7.
[2] Participation in both law-related and other
extrajudicial activities helps integrate judges into their
communities and furthers public understanding of and respect for
courts and the judicial system.
[3] Discriminatory actions and expressions of bias or
prejudice by a judge, even outside the judge's official or
judicial actions, are likely to appear to a reasonable person to
call into question the judge's integrity and impartiality.
Examples include jokes or other remarks that demean individuals
based upon their race, sex, gender, religion, national origin,
ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic
status. For the same reason, a judge's extrajudicial activities
must not be conducted in connection or affiliation with an
organization that practices invidious discrimination. See Rule
18-103.6.
[4] While engaged in permitted extrajudicial activities,
judges must not coerce others or take action that would
reasonably be perceived as coercive. For example, depending upon
the circumstances, a judge's solicitation of contributions or
memberships for an organization, even as permitted by Rule 18103.7 (a), might create the risk that the person solicited would
feel obligated to respond favorably, or would do so to curry
favor with the judge.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.1 of Rule 16-813
-62-
Rule 18-103.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.2.
APPEARANCES BEFORE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES AND
CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS (ABA RULE 3.2)
A judge shall not appear voluntarily at a public hearing
before, or otherwise consult with, an executive or a legislative
body or official, except:
(a) in connection with matters concerning the law, the legal
system, or the administration of justice;
(b) in connection with matters about which the judge acquired
knowledge or expertise in the course of the judge's judicial
duties; or
(c) when the judge is acting self-represented in a matter
involving the judge's legal or economic interests, or when the
judge is acting in a fiduciary capacity.
COMMENT
[1] Judges possess special expertise in matters of law, the
legal system, and the administration of justice, and may properly
share that expertise with governmental bodies and officials in
the executive or legislative branch.
[2] In appearing before governmental bodies or consulting
with government officials, judges must be mindful that they
remain subject to other provisions of this Code, such as Rule 18101.3, prohibiting judges from using the prestige of office to
advance their own or others' interests, Rule 18-102.10, governing
public comment on pending and impending matters, and Rule 18103.1 (c), prohibiting judges from engaging in extrajudicial
activities that would appear to a reasonable person to undermine
-63-
Rule 18-103.2
the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality.
[3] In general, it would be an unnecessary and unfair
burden to prohibit judges from appearing before governmental
bodies or consulting with government officials on matters that
are likely to affect them as private individuals, such as zoning
proposals affecting their real property. In engaging in such
activities, however, judges must not refer to their judicial
positions, and must otherwise exercise caution to avoid using the
prestige of judicial office.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.2 of Rule 16-813
-64-
Rule 18-103.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.3.
TESTIFYING AS A CHARACTER WITNESS (ABA RULE 3.3)
Except when duly subpoenaed, a judge shall not testify as a
character witness in a judicial, administrative, or other
adjudicatory proceeding or otherwise vouch for the character of a
person in a legal proceeding.
COMMENT
[1] A judge who, without being subpoenaed, testifies as a
character witness abuses the prestige of judicial office to
advance the interests of another. See Rule 18-101.3. Except in
unusual circumstances where the demands of justice require, a
judge should discourage a party from requiring the judge to
testify as a character witness.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.3 of Rule 16-813
-65-
Rule 18-103.4
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.4.
APPOINTMENT TO GOVERNMENTAL POSITIONS (ABA RULE 3.4)
A judge shall not accept appointment to a governmental
committee, board, commission, or other governmental position,
unless it is one that concerns the law, the legal system, or the
administration of justice.
COMMENT
[1] Rule 18-103.4 implicitly acknowledges the value of
judges accepting appointments to entities that concern the law,
the legal system, or the administration of justice. Even in such
instances, however, a judge should assess the appropriateness of
accepting an appointment, paying particular attention to the
subject matter of the appointment and the availability and
allocation of judicial resources, including the judge's time
commitments, and giving due regard to the requirements of the
independence and impartiality of the judiciary.
[2] A judge may not accept a governmental appointment that
could interfere with the effectiveness and independence of the
judiciary, assume or discharge an executive or legislative power,
or hold another "office" under the Constitution or laws of the
United States or the State of Maryland. See Maryland Declaration
of Rights, Articles 8, 33, and 35.
[3] A judge may represent his or her country, State, or
locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with
historical, educational, or cultural activities. Such
representation does not constitute acceptance of a government
position.
Committee note: Although the Judicial Ethics Committee has
concluded that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution may
allow service in reserve components of the armed forces that
otherwise might be precluded under this Code, such as service as
a judge advocate or military judge, the Attorney General, rather
than the Judicial Ethics Committee, traditionally has rendered
-66-
Rule 18-103.4
opinions with regard to issues of dual or incompatible offices.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.4 of Rule 16-813
-67-
Rule 18-103.5
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.5.
USE OF NONPUBLIC INFORMATION (ABA RULE 3.5)
A judge shall not intentionally disclose or use nonpublic
information acquired in a judicial capacity for any purpose
unrelated to the judge's judicial duties.
Nonpublic information
means information that is not available to the public.
It may
include information that is (a) sealed or shielded pursuant to
the Maryland Rules, other law, or court order, (b) impounded, (c)
communicated in camera, or (d) offered in grand jury proceedings,
pre-sentencing reports, dependency cases, or psychiatric reports.
COMMENT
[1] In the course of performing judicial duties, a judge
may acquire information of commercial or other value that is
unavailable to the public. The judge must not reveal or use such
information for personal gain or for any purpose unrelated to his
or her judicial duties.
[2] This Rule is not intended, however, to affect a judge's
ability to act on information as necessary to protect the health
or safety of the judge or a member of a judge's family, court
personnel, or other judicial officers.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.5 of Rule 16-813
-68-
Rule 18-103.6
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.6.
AFFILIATION WITH DISCRIMINATORY ORGANIZATIONS
(ABA RULE 3.6)
(a)
A judge shall not hold membership in any organization that
practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex,
gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual
orientation.
(b)
A judge shall not use the benefits or facilities of an
organization if the judge knows or should know that the
organization practices invidious discrimination on one or more of
the bases identified in section (a) of this Rule.
A judge's
attendance at an event in a facility of an organization that the
judge is not permitted to join is not a violation of this Rule
when the judge's attendance is an isolated event that could not
reasonably be perceived as an endorsement of the organization's
practices.
COMMENT
[1] A judge's public manifestation of approval of invidious
discrimination on any basis gives rise to the appearance of
impropriety and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary. A judge's membership in an
organization that practices invidious discrimination creates the
perception that the judge's impartiality is impaired.
[2] An organization is generally said to discriminate
invidiously if it arbitrarily excludes from membership on the
-69-
Rule 18-103.6
basis of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity,
or sexual orientation individuals who would otherwise be eligible
for admission. Whether an organization practices invidious
discrimination is a complex question to which judges should be
attentive. The answer cannot be determined from a mere
examination of an organization's current membership rolls, but
rather, depends upon how the organization selects members, as
well as other relevant factors, such as whether the organization
is dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic, or
cultural values of legitimate common interest to its members, or
whether it is an intimate, purely private organization whose
membership limitations could not constitutionally be prohibited.
[3] When a judge learns that an organization to which the
judge belongs engages in invidious discrimination, the judge must
resign immediately from the organization.
[4] A judge's membership in a religious organization as a
lawful exercise of the freedom of religion is not a violation of
this Rule.
[5]
service.
This Rule does not apply to national or state military
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.6 of Rule 16-813
-70-
Rule 18-103.7
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.7.
PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS,
CHARITABLE, FRATERNAL, OR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTIVITIES
(ABA RULE 3.7)
(a)
Subject to the requirements of Rules 18-103.1 and 18-
103.6, a judge may participate in activities sponsored by
organizations or governmental entities concerned with the law,
the legal system, or the administration of justice, and those
sponsored by or on behalf of educational, religious, charitable,
fraternal, or civic organizations not conducted for profit,
including the following activities:
(1) assisting such an organization or entity in planning
related to fund-raising, and participating in the management and
investment of the organization's or entity's funds;
(2) soliciting contributions for such an organization or
entity, but only from members of the judge's family, or from
judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or
appellate authority;
(3) soliciting membership for such an organization or entity,
even though the membership dues or fees generated may be used to
support the objectives of the organization or entity, but only if
the organization or entity is concerned with the law, the legal
-71-
Rule 18-103.7
system, or the administration of justice;
(4) appearing or speaking at, receiving an award or other
recognition at, being featured on the program of, and permitting
his or her title to be used in connection with an event of such
an organization or entity, but if the event serves a fund-raising
purpose, the judge may participate only if the event concerns the
law, the legal system, or the administration of justice;
(5) making recommendations to such a public or private
fund-granting organization or entity in connection with its
programs and activities, but only if the organization or entity
is concerned with the law, the legal system, or the
administration of justice; and
(6) serving as an officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal
advisor of such an organization or entity, unless it is likely
that the organization or entity:
(A) will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily
come before the judge; or
(B) will frequently be engaged in adversary proceedings in
the court of which the judge is a member, or in any court subject
to the appellate jurisdiction of the court of which the judge is
a member.
(b)
A judge may encourage but not coerce attorneys to provide
pro bono publico legal services.
COMMENT
[1] The activities permitted by section (a) of this Rule
generally include those sponsored by or undertaken on behalf of
-72-
Rule 18-103.7
public or private not-for-profit educational institutions, and
other not-for-profit organizations, including law-related,
charitable, and other organizations.
[2] Even for law-related organizations, a judge should
consider whether the membership and purposes of the organization
or the nature of the judge's participation in or association with
the organization would conflict with the judge's obligation to
refrain from activities that reflect adversely upon a judge's
independence, integrity, and impartiality.
[3] Mere attendance at an event, whether or not the event
serves a fund-raising purpose, does not constitute a violation of
subsection (a)(4) of this Rule. It is also generally permissible
for a judge to serve as an usher or a food server or preparer, or
to perform similar functions, at fund-raising events sponsored by
educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic
organizations. Such activities are not solicitation and do not
present an element of coercion or abuse the prestige of judicial
office.
[4] Identification of a judge's position in educational,
religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations on
letterhead used for fund-raising or membership solicitation does
not violate this Rule. The letterhead may list the judge's title
or judicial office if comparable designations are used for other
individuals.
[5] In addition to appointing attorneys to serve as counsel
for indigent parties in individual cases, a judge may promote
broader access to justice by encouraging attorneys to participate
in pro bono publico legal services, if in doing so the judge does
not employ coercion, or abuse the prestige of judicial office.
Such encouragement may take many forms, including providing lists
of available programs, training attorneys to do pro bono publico
legal work, and participating in events recognizing attorneys who
have done pro bono publico work.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.7 of Rule 16-813
-73-
Rule 18-103.8
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.8.
(a)
APPOINTMENTS TO FIDUCIARY POSITIONS (ABA RULE 3.8)
A judge shall not accept appointment to serve in a
fiduciary position, such as executor, administrator, trustee,
guardian, attorney in fact, or other personal representative,
except for an estate or trust for a member of the judge's family
or an individual who is a member of the judge’s family, and then
only if such service will not interfere with the proper
performance of judicial duties.
(b)
A judge shall not serve in a fiduciary position if the
judge as fiduciary will likely be engaged in proceedings that
would ordinarily come before the judge, or if the estate, trust,
or ward becomes involved in adversary proceedings in the court on
which the judge serves, or one under its appellate jurisdiction.
(c)
A judge acting in a fiduciary capacity shall be subject
to the same restrictions on engaging in financial activities that
apply to a judge personally.
(d)
If an individual who is serving in a fiduciary position
becomes a judge, he or she must comply with this Rule as soon as
reasonably practicable, but in no event later than one year after
becoming a judge.
-74-
Rule 18-103.8
(e)
Section (a) of this Rule does not apply to retired judges
approved for recall under Code, Courts Article, §1-302.
COMMENT
[1] A judge should recognize that other restrictions
imposed by this Code may conflict with a judge's obligations as a
fiduciary; in such circumstances, a judge should resign as
fiduciary. For example, serving as a fiduciary might require
frequent disqualification of a judge under Rule 18-102.11 because
a judge is deemed to have an economic interest in shares of stock
held by a trust if the amount of stock held is more than de
minimis.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.8 of Rule 16-813
-75-
Rule 18-103.9
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.9.
(a)
SERVICE AS ARBITRATOR OR MEDIATOR (ABA RULE 3.9)
Unless expressly authorized by law, a judge shall not act
as an arbitrator or a mediator or perform other judicial
functions apart from the judge's official duties.
(b)
A retired judge who is approved for recall for temporary
service under Code, Courts Article, §1-302 may conduct
alternative dispute resolution (ADR) proceedings in a private
capacity only if the judge:
(1) conducts no ADR proceedings in a private capacity
relating to a case in which the judge currently is sitting;
(2) is not affiliated with a law firm, regardless of whether
the law firm also offers ADR services;
(3) discloses to the parties in each judicial proceeding in
which the judge sits:
(A) the judge's professional association with any entity
that is engaged in offering ADR services;
(B) whether the judge is conducting, or has conducted
within the previous 12 months, an ADR proceeding involving any
party, attorney, or law firm involved in the judicial proceeding
pending before the judge; and
(C) any negotiations or agreements for future ADR services
-76-
Rule 18-103.9
involving the judge and any of the parties or attorneys to the
case; and
(4) except when there is no disqualification by agreement as
permitted by Rule 18-102.11 (c), does not sit in a judicial
proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be
questioned because of ADR services engaged in or offered by the
judge.
Committee note: A retired judge approved for recall may
affiliate with an entity that is engaged exclusively in offering
ADR services but may not affiliate with any entity that also is
engaged in the practice of law.
COMMENT
[1] Except as provided in section (b), this Rule does not
prohibit a judge from participating in arbitration, mediation, or
prehearing or settlement conferences performed as part of
assigned judicial duties. Rendering dispute resolution services
apart from those duties, whether or not for economic gain, is
prohibited unless it is expressly authorized by law.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.9 of Rule 16-813
-77-
Rule 18-103.10
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.10.
(a)
PRACTICE OF LAW (ABA RULE 3.10)
In General
Except as expressly allowed by this Rule, a judge shall
not practice law.
Cross reference: See Code, Courts Article, §1-203.
(b)
Exceptions
(1) A judge may act self-represented in a matter involving
the judge or the judge's interest and, if without compensation,
may give legal advice to and draft or review documents for a
member of the judge's family.
(2) To the extent expressly allowed by law and subject to
other applicable provisions of this Code, a part-time judge of an
orphans' court who is an attorney may practice law, provided
that:
(A) the judge shall not use the judge's judicial office to
further the judge's success in the practice of law; and
(B) the judge shall not appear as an attorney in the court
in which the judge serves.
Cross reference: See Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §2-109
for restrictions on the practice of law by a part-time judge of
an orphans' court.
-78-
Rule 18-103.10
COMMENT
[1] A judge may act self-represented in all legal matters,
including matters involving litigation and matters involving
appearances before or other dealings with governmental bodies. A
judge must not use the prestige of office to advance the judge's
personal or family interests. See Rule 18-101.3.
[2] Section (a) and subsection (b)(1) of this Rule limit
the practice of law in a representative capacity but not in a
self-represented capacity. A judge may act for himself or
herself in all legal matters, including matters involving
litigation and matters involving appearances before or other
dealings with legislative and other governmental bodies. In so
doing, however, a judge must not abuse the prestige of office for
any reason, including advancement of an interest of the judge or
the judge's family. See Rules 18-102.4 (b) and 18-103.2 (c).
[3] This Rule allows a judge to give legal advice to, and
draft legal documents for, a member of the judge's family.
Except for a part-time orphans' court judge allowed to practice
law, however, a judge must not receive any compensation from, or
act as an advocate or negotiator for, a member of the judge's
family in a legal matter.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.10 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-79-
Rule 18-103.11
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.11.
FINANCIAL, BUSINESS, OR REMUNERATIVE ACTIVITIES
(ABA RULE 3.11)
(a)
A judge may hold and manage investments of the judge and
members of the judge's family.
(b)
Except as permitted by Rule 18-103.7, a judge shall not
serve as an officer, director, manager, general partner, advisor,
or employee of any business entity except that a judge may manage
or participate in:
(1) a business closely held by the judge or members of the
judge's family; or
(2) a business entity primarily engaged in investment of the
financial resources of the judge or members of the judge's
family.
(c)
A judge shall not engage in financial activities permitted
under sections (a) or (b) of this Rule if they will:
(1) interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties;
(2) lead to frequent disqualification of the judge;
(3) involve the judge in frequent transactions or continuing
business relationships with attorneys or other persons likely to
come before the court on which the judge serves; or
(4) result in violation of other provisions of this Code.
-80-
Rule 18-103.11
(d)
This Rule does not apply to retired judges approved for
recall under Code, Courts Article, §1-302.
COMMENT
[1] Judges are generally permitted to engage in financial
activities, including managing real estate and other investments
for themselves or for members of their families. Participation
in these activities, like participation in other extrajudicial
activities, is subject to the requirements of this Code. For
example, it would be improper for a judge to spend so much time
on business activities that it interferes with the performance of
judicial duties. See Rule 18-102.1. Similarly, it would be
improper for a judge to use his or her official title or appear
in judicial robes in business advertising, or to conduct his or
her business or financial affairs in such a way that
disqualification is frequently required. See Rules 18-101.3 and
18-102.11.
[2] As soon as practicable without serious financial
detriment, the judge must divest himself or herself of
investments and other financial interests that might require
frequent disqualification or otherwise violate this Rule.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.11 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-81-
Rule 18-103.12
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.12.
COMPENSATION FOR EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES
(ABA RULE 3.12)
A judge may accept reasonable compensation for extrajudicial
activities permitted by this Code or other law unless such
acceptance would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the
judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality.
Cross reference: See Rule 18-103.9 requiring certain disclosures
and action by retired judges approved for recall who provide
alternative dispute resolution services.
COMMENT
[1] A judge is permitted to accept honoraria, stipends,
fees, wages, salaries, royalties, or other compensation for
speaking, teaching, writing, and other extrajudicial activities,
provided the compensation is reasonable and commensurate with the
task performed. The judge should be mindful, however, that
judicial duties must take precedence over other activities. See
Rule 18-102.1, Code, Family Law Article, §§2-406 and 2-410, and
Md. Rules 18-501 through 18-504.
[2] Compensation derived from extrajudicial activities may
be subject to public reporting. See Rule 18-103.15.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.12 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-82-
Rule 18-103.13
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.13.
ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS, LOANS, BEQUESTS, BENEFITS,
OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE (ABA RULE 3.13)
(a)
A judge shall not accept any gifts, loans, bequests,
benefits, or other things of value, if acceptance is prohibited
by law or would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the
judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality.
(b)
Unless otherwise prohibited by law, or by section (a) of
this Rule, a judge may accept the following:
(1) items with little intrinsic value, such as plaques,
certificates, trophies, and greeting cards;
(2) gifts, loans, bequests, benefits, or other things of
value from friends, relatives, or other persons, including
attorneys, whose appearance or interest in a proceeding pending
or impending before the judge would in any event require
disqualification of the judge under Rule 18-102.11;
(3) ordinary social hospitality;
(4) commercial or financial opportunities and benefits,
including special pricing and discounts, and loans from lending
institutions in their regular course of business, if the same
opportunities and benefits or loans are made available on the
same terms to similarly situated persons who are not judges;
-83-
Rule 18-103.13
(5) rewards and prizes given to competitors or participants
in random drawings, contests, or other events that are open to
persons who are not judges;
(6) scholarships, fellowships, and similar benefits or
awards, if they are available to similarly situated individuals
who are not judges, based upon the same terms and criteria;
(7) books, magazines, journals, audiovisual materials, and
other resource materials supplied by publishers on a
complimentary basis for official use;
(8) gifts, awards, or benefits associated with the business,
profession, or other separate activity of a spouse, a domestic
partner, or other family member of a judge residing in the
judge's household, but that incidentally benefit the judge;
(9) gifts incident to a public testimonial; or
(10) invitations to the judge and the judge's spouse,
domestic partner, or guest to attend without charge:
(A) an event associated with a bar-related function or
other activity relating to the law, the legal system, or the
administration of justice; or
(B) an event associated with any of the judge's
educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic activities
permitted by this Code, if the same invitation is offered to
nonjudges who are engaged in similar ways in the activity as is
the judge.
COMMENT
[1]
Whenever a judge accepts a gift or other thing of value
-84-
Rule 18-103.13
without paying fair market value, there is a risk that the
benefit might be viewed as intended to influence the judge's
decision in a case. Rule 18-103.13 imposes restrictions upon the
acceptance of such benefits, according to the magnitude of the
risk. Section (b) of this Rule identifies circumstances in which
the risk that the acceptance would appear to undermine the
judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality is low. As the
value of the benefit or the likelihood that the source of the
benefit will appear before the judge increases, the judge is
prohibited under section (a) of this Rule from accepting the
gift.
[2] Gift-giving between friends and relatives is a common
occurrence, and ordinarily does not create an appearance of
impropriety or cause reasonable persons to believe that the
judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality has been
compromised. In addition, when the appearance of friends or
relatives in a case would require the judge's disqualification
under Rule 18-102.11, there would be no opportunity for a gift to
influence the judge's decision-making. Subsection (b)(2) of this
Rule places no restrictions upon the ability of a judge to accept
gifts or other things of value from friends or relatives under
these circumstances.
[3] Businesses and financial institutions frequently make
available special pricing, discounts, and other benefits, either
in connection with a temporary promotion or for preferred
customers, based upon longevity of the relationship, volume of
business transacted, and other factors. A judge may freely
accept such benefits if they are available to the general public,
or if the judge qualifies for the special price or discount
according to the same criteria as are applied to persons who are
not judges. As an example, loans provided at generally
prevailing interest rates are not gifts, but a judge could not
accept a loan from a financial institution at below-market
interest rates unless the same rate was being made available to
the general public for a certain period of time or only to
borrowers with specified qualifications that the judge also
possesses.
[4] Rule 18-103.13 applies only to acceptance of gifts or
other things of value by a judge. Nonetheless, if a gift or
other benefit is given to the judge's spouse, domestic partner,
or member of the judge's family residing in the judge's
household, it may be viewed as an attempt to evade Rule 18-103.13
and influence the judge indirectly. Where the gift or benefit is
being made primarily to such other individuals, and the judge is
merely an incidental beneficiary, this concern is reduced. A
judge should, however, remind family and household members of the
restrictions imposed upon judges and urge them to take these
restrictions into account when making decisions about accepting
-85-
Rule 18-103.13
such gifts or benefits.
[5] Rule 18-103.13 does not apply to contributions to a
judge's campaign for judicial office.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.13 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-86-
Rule 18-103.14
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.14.
REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AND WAIVERS OF FEES OR
CHARGES (ABA RULE 3.14)
(a)
Unless otherwise prohibited by Rule 18-103.1, Rule 18-
103.13 (a), or other law, a judge may accept reimbursement of
necessary and reasonable expenses for travel, food, lodging, or
other incidental expenses, or a waiver or partial waiver of fees
or charges for registration, tuition, and similar items, from
sources other than the judge's employing entity, if the expenses
or charges are associated with the judge's participation in
extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code.
(b)
Reimbursement of expenses for necessary travel, food,
lodging, or other incidental expenses shall be limited to the
actual costs reasonably incurred by the judge and, when
appropriate to the occasion, by the judge's spouse, domestic
partner, or guest.
COMMENT
[1] Educational, civic, religious, fraternal, and
charitable organizations often sponsor meetings, seminars,
symposia, dinners, awards ceremonies, and similar events. Judges
are encouraged to attend educational programs, as both teachers
and participants, in law-related and academic disciplines, in
furtherance of their duty to remain competent in the law.
Participation in a variety of other extrajudicial activities is
also permitted and encouraged by this Code.
-87-
Rule 18-103.14
[2] Not infrequently, sponsoring organizations invite
certain judges to attend seminars or other events on a fee-waived
or partial fee-waived basis, and sometimes include reimbursement
for necessary travel, food, lodging, or other incidental
expenses. A judge's decision whether to accept reimbursement of
expenses or a waiver or partial waiver of fees or charges in
connection with these or other extrajudicial activities must be
based upon an assessment of all the circumstances. The judge
must undertake a reasonable inquiry to obtain the information
necessary to make an informed judgment about whether acceptance
would be consistent with the requirements of this Code.
[3] A judge must assure himself or herself that acceptance
of reimbursement or fee waivers would not appear to a reasonable
person to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or
impartiality. The factors that a judge should consider when
deciding whether to accept reimbursement or a fee waiver for
attendance at a particular activity include:
(a) whether the sponsor is an accredited educational
institution or bar association rather than a trade association or
a for-profit entity;
(b) whether the funding comes largely from numerous
contributors rather than from a single entity and is earmarked
for programs with specific content;
(c) whether the content is related or unrelated to the
subject matter of litigation pending or impending before the
judge, or to matters that are likely to come before the judge;
(d) whether the activity is primarily educational
rather than recreational, and whether the costs of the event are
reasonable and comparable to those associated with similar events
sponsored by the judiciary, bar associations, or similar groups;
(e) whether information concerning the activity and its
funding sources is available upon inquiry;
(f) whether the sponsor or source of funding is
generally associated with particular parties or interests
currently appearing or likely to appear in the judge's court,
thus possibly requiring disqualification of the judge under Rule
18-102.11;
(g) whether differing viewpoints are presented; and
(h) whether a broad range of judicial and nonjudicial
participants are invited, whether a large number of participants
are invited, and whether the program is designed specifically for
judges.
-88-
Rule 18-103.14
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.14 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-89-
Rule 18-103.15
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-103.15.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (ABA RULE 3.15)
A judge shall accurately complete and timely file an annual
Financial Disclosure Statement on the form and as otherwise
prescribed by the Court of Appeals pursuant to Rule 18-603.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 3.15 of Rule 16813 (2016).
-90-
Rule 18-104.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.1.
(a)
DEFINITIONS (ABA RULE 4.1)
Applicant
(1) "Applicant" means an individual who has applied for
appointment by the Governor to a judicial office.
(2) The individual becomes an applicant when the individual
files an application with a judicial nominating commission and
remains an applicant until the Governor makes an appointment to
that judicial office unless, prior to that time, the individual
formally withdraws the application.
(3) If the individual is not appointed but, pursuant to an
Executive Order of the Governor or other law, remains eligible
for appointment to another judicial office without a further
application to or recommendation from the judicial nominating
commission, the individual remains an applicant until the
Governor makes an appointment to that other judicial office,
unless, prior to that time, the individual formally withdraws the
application.
Cross reference:
(b)
Executive Order 01.01.2015.09.
Candidate
"Candidate" means a candidate for election or a District
Court candidate for retention.
-91-
Rule 18-104.1
(c)
Candidate for Election
(1) "Candidate for election" means an individual who:
(A) seeks initial election to a Circuit Court or an
Orphans' Court;
(B) is an incumbent judge of a Circuit Court or Orphans'
Court and seeks to retain that office through an election
conducted pursuant to Art. IV, §3, 5, or 40 of the Maryland
Constitution; or
(C) is an incumbent judge of the Court of Appeals or Court
of Special Appeals and seeks to retain that office through a
retention election conducted pursuant to Art. IV, §5A of the
Maryland Constitution.
(2) An individual becomes a candidate for election:
(A) if the individual is a newly appointed judge, from the
date the judge takes the oath of office;
(B) if the individual is any other incumbent judge, from
the earlier of:
(i) the date two years prior to the general election
pertaining to that judge's re-election or subsequent retention;
or
(ii) the date on which a newly appointed judge to that
court becomes a candidate in the same general election.
(C) if the individual is a judge who seeks election to
another judicial office, the earlier of:
(i) the date on which the judge files a certificate of
candidacy in accordance with Maryland election laws, but no
-92-
Rule 18-104.1
earlier than two years prior to the general election for that
office; or
(ii) the date on which a newly appointed judge to that
court becomes a candidate in the same general election; and
(D) if the individual is an attorney who seeks a judicial
office, the date on which the attorney files a certificate of
candidacy in accordance with Maryland election laws, but no
earlier than two years prior to the general election for the
office.
(3) An individual who becomes a candidate under section (c)
of this Rule remains a candidate until the general election for
the office unless, prior to that time, the individual files a
formal withdrawal of candidacy in accordance with Maryland
election laws.
(d)
District Court Candidate for Retention
"District Court candidate for retention" means an
incumbent judge of the District Court who seeks retention for an
additional term pursuant to Art. IV, §41D of the Maryland
Constitution.
A District Court judge becomes a candidate for
retention from the date one year prior to the expiration of the
judge's current term.
(e)
Political Organization
"Political organization" includes a political party, a
political committee, and a partisan organization, as those terms
are defined in Maryland Code, Election Article, §1-101.
-93-
Rule 18-104.1
COMMENT
[1] Rule 18-104.1 is intended to reflect and focus on the
different ways in which judges in Maryland are selected and
retained. See Maryland Constitution, Art. IV, §5A (appellate
judges), §§3 and 5 (Circuit Court judges), §41D (District Court
judges), and §40 (Orphans' Court judges).
(a) In all cases, a vacancy is filled by appointment by
the Governor. The appointment of appellate, District Court, and
Orphans' Court judges requires the advice and consent of the
Senate; the appointment of Circuit Court judges does not.
(b) Appellate judges then face an uncontested
plebiscite election (yes or no for continuance in office) for an
additional 10-year term, following which they face another such
election for a succeeding term.
(c) Circuit Court judges face a potentially contested
primary and general election for a 15-year term, at the end of
which, in order to remain in office, they must be appointed by
the Governor for a "bridge" term until the next election and then
prevail in that election.
(d) District Court judges do not face election but
receive a 10-year term, at the end of which, they must be
reappointed by the Governor subject to confirmation by the
Senate.
(e) Orphans' Court judges face a potentially contested
primary and general election every four years.
[2] The first context, applicable to all appellate, Circuit
Court, and District Court judges and many Orphans' Court judges,
is initial appointment by the Governor to fill a vacancy. Except
for Orphans' Court judges, that requires an application to and
consideration by a judicial nominating commission, which normally
interviews the applicants, receives information and
recommendations from Bar Associations, other interested groups,
and members of the public, and sends to the Governor a list of
recommended applicants. The Governors have agreed, expressly or
tacitly, to appoint from the list of applicants recommended by
the applicable nominating commission. The applicants may be
attorneys seeking initial appointment to the Bench, incumbent
Circuit Court judges seeking reappointment, upon the expiration
of their 15-year term, for a "bridge" period until the next
election, or other judges seeking appointment to a different
court. Rule 18-104.1 (a) defines those individuals as
"applicants."
-94-
Rule 18-104.1
[3] An individual seeking election, either through a
potentially contested election (Circuit Court and Orphans' Court)
or through a plebiscite-type retention election (appellate
judges), is defined in Rule 18-104.1 (c) as a "candidate for
election." A District Court judge, at the end of the 10-year
term, faces confirmation by the Senate for an additional term.
That judge is not a candidate for election but is defined in Rule
18-104.1 (d) as a "District Court candidate for retention."
[4] Rules 18-104.2 through 18-104.6 specify the political
activity allowed or not allowed to individuals falling within
those categories, as well as to incumbent judges who are not
within any of them.
[5] Even when subject to election, a judge plays a role
different from that of a legislator or executive branch official.
Rather than making decisions based on the expressed views or
preferences of the electorate, a judge makes decisions based on
the law and the facts of each case. In furtherance of that
interest, judges and candidates for judicial office must, to the
greatest extent possible, be free and appear to be free from
political influence and political pressure. Rules 18-104.1
through 18.104.6 impose narrowly tailored restrictions on the
political and campaign activities of all judges and candidates
for judicial office.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 4.1 of Rule 16-813
-95-
Rule 18-104.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.2.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF JUDGE WHO IS NOT A CANDIDATE
(ABA RULE 4.2)
(a)
A judge who is not a candidate shall not engage in any
partisan political activity.
(b)
A judge shall resign when the judge becomes a candidate
for a non-judicial office, except that a judge may continue to
hold judicial office while a candidate for election as a delegate
to a Maryland Constitutional Convention.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 4.2 of Rule 16-813
-96-
Rule 18-104.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.3.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF APPLICANT (ABA RULE 4.3)
An applicant for judicial office may initiate communications
or contact with a judicial nominating commission or its members
and may seek endorsements for the appointment from any other
person, other than a political organization.
COMMENT
[1] Rule 18-104.3 is derived in part from Rule 4.3 of the
2007 ABA Code but departs from it in one important respect.
Under Rule 18-104.3, an applicant may initiate communications or
contact with a judicial nominating commission or its members, but
neither the Commission nor its members are obliged to respond to
such communications or contact. Applicants may appear for
interviews before the commission and may respond to questions or
inquiries from commission members, and they may solicit
endorsements from other persons (other than a political
organization). If they have a question regarding the procedure
or their application, they may contact the Administrative Office
of the Courts.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 4.3 of Rule 16-813
-97-
Rule 18-104.4
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.4.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF CANDIDATE FOR ELECTION
(ABA RULE 4.4)
A candidate for election:
(a)
shall comply with all applicable election laws and
regulations;
(b)
shall act at all times in a manner consistent with the
independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary and
maintain the dignity appropriate to judicial office;
(c)
subject to the other provisions of this Rule, may engage
in partisan political activity allowed by law with respect to
such candidacy, and, in that regard:
(1) may publicly endorse or oppose candidates for the same
judicial office;
(2) may attend or purchase tickets for dinners or other
events sponsored by a political organization or a candidate for
public office; and
(3) may seek, accept, and use endorsements from any person;
but
(4) shall not act as a leader in or hold office in a
political organization, make a speech for a candidate
or
political organization, or publicly endorse a candidate for non-
-98-
Rule 18-104.4
judicial office.
(d)
As to statements and materials made or produced during a
campaign:
(1) shall review, approve, and be responsible for the content
of all campaign statements and materials produced by the
candidate or by the candidate's campaign committee or other
authorized agents;
(2) shall take reasonable measures to ensure that other
persons do not undertake on behalf of the candidate activities
that the candidate is prohibited from doing by this Rule;
(3) with respect to a case, controversy, or issue that is
likely to come before the court, shall not make a commitment,
pledge, or promise that is inconsistent with the impartial
performance of the adjudicative duties of the office;
(4) shall not make any statement that would reasonably be
expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a matter
pending or impending in any court;
(5) shall not knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the
truth, misrepresent the candidate's identity or qualifications,
the identity or qualifications of an opponent, or any other fact,
or make any false or misleading statement;
(6) may speak or write on behalf of the candidate's candidacy
through any medium, including advertisements, websites, or other
campaign literature; and
(7) subject to section (b) of this Rule, may respond to a
personal attack or an attack on the candidate's record.
-99-
Rule 18-104.4
COMMENT
[1] This Rule is derived in part from former Md. Code of
Judicial Conduct Canon 5B and from the 2007 ABA Code, but it has
been substantially reorganized into three basic segments: general
requirements (sections (a) and (b)); the extent to which
candidates for election may engage in partisan political conduct
(section (c)); and the rules governing campaign statements
(section (d)).
[2] Rule 18-104.4 (a) requires candidates for election to
comply with all election laws and regulations. The Election Law
Article of the Maryland Code contains laws governing candidates,
campaign contributions, finance, expenditures, and reporting.
Those requirements are supplemented by regulations adopted by the
State Board of Elections. Candidates for election must become
familiar with applicable laws and regulations and comply with
them.
[3] Public confidence in the independence and impartiality
of the judiciary is eroded if judges or candidates for judicial
office are perceived to be subject to political influence.
Although they may register to vote as members of a political
party, they are prohibited by Rule 18-104.4 (c)(4) from assuming
leadership roles in political organizations.
[4] Rule 18-104.4 (c)(4) also prohibits candidates for
election from making speeches on behalf of political
organizations or publicly endorsing or opposing candidates for
public office, to prevent them from abusing the prestige of
judicial office to advance the interests of others. See Rule 18101.3. Rule 18-104.4 does not prohibit candidates for election
from (a) campaigning on their own behalf, (b) endorsing or
opposing candidates for election to the same judicial office for
which they are running, or (c) from having their name on the same
sample ballot as a candidate for another public office.
[5] Although members of the families of candidates for
election are free to engage in their own political activity,
including running for public office, there is no "family
exception" to the prohibition in Rule 18-104.4 (c)(4) against
publicly endorsing candidates for public office. A candidate for
election must not become involved in, or be publicly associated
with, a family member's political activity or campaign for public
office. To avoid public misunderstanding, candidates for
election should take, and should urge members of their families
to take, reasonable steps to avoid any implication that they
endorse any family member's candidacy or other political
activity.
-100-
Rule 18-104.4
[6] Judicial candidates must be scrupulously fair and
accurate in all statements made by them and by their campaign
committees. Rule 18-104.4 (d)(5) obligates them to refrain from
making statements that are false or misleading, or that omit
facts necessary to make the communication considered as a whole
not materially misleading. Rule 18-104.4 (d)(1) requires the
candidate to review and approve the content of statements made by
the candidate's campaign committee or other authorized agents and
makes the candidate responsible for those statements.
[7] Candidates for election are sometimes the subject of
false, misleading, or unfair allegations made by opposing
candidates, third parties, or the media. As long as the
candidate for election does not violate Rule 18-104.4 (d), he or
she may make a factually accurate public response, although it is
preferable for someone else to respond if the allegations relate
to a pending case. If an independent third party has made
unwarranted attacks on a candidate for election's opponent, the
candidate for election may disavow the attacks and request the
third party to cease and desist.
[8] Rule 18-104.4 (d)(3) prohibits candidates for election,
with regard to cases or issues likely to come before the court,
from making a commitment, promise, or pledge that is inconsistent
with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of the
office. The making of a commitment, promise, or pledge is not
dependent on, or limited to, the use of any specific words or
phrases. The totality of the statement must be examined to
determine if a reasonable person would believe that the candidate
has specifically undertaken to reach a particular result.
Commitments, promises, and pledges must be contrasted with
statements or announcements of personal views on legal,
political, or other issues, which are not prohibited. When
making such statements, a judge should acknowledge the
overarching judicial obligation to apply and uphold the law,
without regard to his or her personal views.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 4.4 of Rule 16-813
-101-
Rule 18-104.5
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.5.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF DISTRICT COURT CANDIDATE FOR
RETENTION (ABA RULE 4.5)
A District Court candidate for retention:
(a) may contact and communicate with the Governor and members
of the State Senate regarding the candidate's reconfirmation;
(b) may seek, accept, and use endorsements from any person;
(c) shall act at all times in a manner consistent with the
independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary and
maintain the dignity appropriate to judicial office;
(d) subject to section (c) of this Rule, may respond to a
personal attack or an attack on the candidate's record;
(e) with respect to a case, controversy, or issue that is
likely to come before the court, shall not make a commitment,
pledge, or promise that is inconsistent with the impartial
performance of the adjudicative duties of the office; and
(f) shall not knowingly or with reckless disregard for the
truth misrepresent the candidate's identity or qualifications or
any other fact.
COMMENT
[1] Because a District Court candidate for retention does
not face an election, the political activity allowed is much more
limited. It is reasonable to permit the judge to contact the
-102-
Rule 18-104.5
Governor, who must transmit the judge's name to the Senate, and
members of the Senate, regarding the judge's reconfirmation, and
to seek endorsements that may be helpful to the judge in that
regard. The constraints in sections (c) through (f) of this
Rule, which are taken from Rule 18-104.4, are applicable as well
to even this political activity.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 4.5 of Rule 16-813
-103-
Rule 18-104.6
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 100 – MARYLAND CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-104.6.
(a)
APPLICABILITY AND DISCIPLINE (ABA RULE 4.6)
A candidate who is a judge shall comply with Rules 18-
104.1 through 18-104.6.
A candidate who is an attorney shall
comply with Rule 19-308.2 of the Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of
Professional Conduct.
(b)
A successful candidate and a judge who unsuccessfully
sought a different judicial office are subject to judicial
discipline for campaign conduct.
An unsuccessful candidate who
is an attorney is subject to attorney discipline for campaign
conduct.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 4.6 of Rule 16-813
-104-
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 - MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, AND DEFINITIONS
Rule 18-200.1.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Rule 18-200.2.
SCOPE
(a) District Court Commissioners and Full-time Standing
Magistrates, Examiners, and Auditors
(b) Part-time Standing Magistrates, Examiners, and
Auditors
(c) Special Magistrates, Examiners, and Auditors
Rule 18-200.3.
DEFINITIONS
(a) Judicial Appointee
(b) Member of Judicial Appointee’s Family
(c) Member of Judicial Appointee’s Household
(d) Other Definitions
RULES GOVERNING INTEGRITY AND THE
AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-201.1.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW
Rule 18-201.2.
PROMOTING CONFIDENCE IN THE JUDICIARY
Rule 18-201.3.
AVOIDING LENDING THE PRESTIGE OF THE POSITION
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A
JUDICIAL APPOINTEE’S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.1.
GIVING PRECEDENCE TO THE DUTIES OF POSITION
Rule 18-202.2.
IMPARTIALITY AND FAIRNESS
-105-
Rule 18-202.3.
BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND HARASSMENT
Rule 18-202.4.
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Rule 18-202.5.
COMPETENCE, DILIGENCE, AND COOPERATION
Rule 18-206.6.
ENSURING THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD
Rule 18-206.7.
RESPONSIBILITY TO DECIDE
Rule 18-202.8.
DECORUM AND DEMEANOR
Rule 18-202.9.
EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
Rule 18-202.10.
STATEMENTS ON PENDING AND IMPENDING CASES
Rule 18-202.11.
DISQUALIFICATION
Rule 18-202.12.
SUPERVISORY DUTIES
Rule 18-202.13.
ADMINISTRATIVE APPOINTMENTS
Rule 18-202.14.
DISABILITY AND IMPAIRMENT OR OTHERS
Rule 18-202.15.
RESPONDING TO JUDICIAL AND ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT
Rule 18-202.16.
COOPERATION WITH DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITIES
RULES GOVERNING EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-203.1.
EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL
Rule 18-203.2.
APPEARANCES BEFORE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES AND
CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
Rule 18-203.3.
TESTIFYING AS A CHARACTER WITNESS
Rule 18-203.4.
APPOINTMENT TO GOVERNMENTAL POSITIONS
Rule 18-203.5.
USE OF NONPUBLIC INFORMATION
Rule 18-203.6.
AFFILIATION WITH DISCRIMINATORY ORGANIZATIONS
Rule 18-203.7.
PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS,
CHARITABLE, FRATERNAL, OR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS AND
ACTIVITIES
Rule 18-203.8.
APPOINTMENTS TO FIDUCIARY POSITIONS
-106-
Rule 18-203.9.
SERVICE AS ARBITRATOR OR MEDIATOR
Rule 18-203.10.
PRACTICE OF LAW
Rule 18-203.11.
FINANCIAL, BUSINESS, OR REMUNERATIVE ACTIVITIES
Rule 18-203.12.
COMPENSATION FOR EXTRA-OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES
Rule 18-203.13.
ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS, LOANS, BEQUESTS, BENEFITS,
OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE
Rule 18-203.14.
REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AND WAIVERS OF FEES OR
CHARGES
Rule 18-203.15.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
RULES GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Rule 18-204.1.
DEFINITIONS
(a) Applicant
(b) Candidate for Election
(c) Political Organization
Rule 18-204.2.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF JUDICIAL APPOINTEE WHO IS
NOT A CANDIDATE
Rule 18-204.3.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF APPLICANT
Rule 18-204.4.
POLITICAL CONDUCT OF CANDIDATE FOR ELECTION
Rule 18-204.5.
APPLICABILITY AND DISCIPLINE
-107-
Rule 18-200.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, AND DEFINITIONS
Rule 18-200.1.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
This Code of Conduct for Judicial Appointees governs the
conduct of judicial appointees.
It is patterned after the
Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct (MCJC) set forth in Title 18,
Chapter 100, and the provisions of this Code should be read in a
consistent manner with parallel provisions in the MCJC.
This Code sets forth minimum standards and is not intended
as a limitation on an appointing authority's power to impose
additional requirements.
Source: This Rule is derived from the Preamble Section of former
Rule 16-814 (2016).
-108-
Rule 18-200.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, AND DEFINITIONS
Rule 18-200.2.
(a)
SCOPE
District Court Commissioners and Full-time Standing
Magistrates, Examiners, and Auditors
This Code applies in its entirety to District Court
Commissioners and full-time standing magistrates, examiners, and
auditors.
(b)
Part-time Standing Magistrates, Examiners, and Auditors
Except as otherwise provided in a specific Rule, this Code
applies in its entirety to part-time standing magistrates,
examiners, and auditors.
(c)
Special Magistrates, Examiners, and Auditors
During the period of their serving in that capacity,
special magistrates, examiners, and auditors are subject only to
Rules 18-200.1 through 18-202.16, to Rule 18-203.5, and to such
of the Comments to those Rules as are relevant, given the limited
duration of the service.
Special magistrates, examiners, and
auditors shall, however, on request of a party or the appointing
authority, disclose any extra-official activity or interests
covered by the other Rules in this Code that may be grounds for a
motion to recuse under Rule 18-202.11.
-109-
Rule 18-200.2
Committee note: District Court Commissioners, despite the number
of hours they may actually be on duty, are regarded as full-time
judicial appointees. Auditors, examiners, and magistrates may
fall into several categories.
Under Code, Courts Article, §2-102, all courts may appoint a
magistrate, examiner, or auditor in "a specific proceeding."
Under Code, Courts Article, §2-501, the judges of the circuit
courts have more general authority to employ magistrates,
examiners, and auditors. That authority is extended and made
more specific in Rules 2-541 (Magistrates), 2-542 (Examiners),
and 2-543 (Auditors).
Rules 2-541, 2-542, and 2-543 create two categories of
magistrates, examiners, and auditors - standing and special.
Standing magistrates, examiners, and auditors are employed to
deal with whatever cases are referred to them on an on-going
basis, but their employment by the court may be full-time or
part-time. Special magistrates, examiners, and auditors are
appointed "for a particular action," and thus, like appointments
made under Code, Courts Article, §2-102, their service is limited
to the particular action or proceeding. During that period of
service, however, it is possible that they may work full-time or
part-time, as necessary or as directed by the court. A
magistrate, examiner, or auditor may therefore be standing
full-time, standing part-time, special full-time, or special
part-time.
This Code, in its entirety, applies to District Court
Commissioners and full-time standing magistrates, examiners, and
auditors. Because their employment by the court is full-time and
more-or-less permanent, it is appropriate to limit some of their
extra-official activities in the same manner as judges. Standing
magistrates, examiners, and auditors who work only part-time but
whose employment is also more-or-less permanent and who handle
whatever cases are referred to them also need to be subject to
most of the requirements and limitations in the Code, but it is
impractical to preclude them from engaging in other lawful
remunerative activities, such as practicing law or accounting or
providing ADR services. They are subject to the entire Code,
except as provided in specific Rules. Special magistrates,
examiners, and auditors, appointed for only one proceeding, are
subject to those Rules governing such things as fairness,
impartiality, integrity, and diligence during the period of their
service, but, with the exception of Rule 18-203.5, it is
impractical and unnecessary to subject them across-the-board to
Rules 18-203.1 through 18-204.5 (political and extra-official
activities), provided that, upon request of a party or the
appointing authority, they disclose any activity or interest that
may be cause for recusal.
-110-
Rule 18-200.2
Source: This Rule is derived from the Application Section of
former Rule 16-814 (2016).
-111-
Rule 18-200.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
GENERAL PROVISIONS, SCOPE, AND DEFINITIONS
Rule 18-200.3.
(a)
DEFINITIONS
Judicial Appointee
"Judicial appointee" means:
(1) an auditor, examiner, or magistrate appointed by a court
of this State; and
Cross reference:
See Rules 2-541, 2-542, and 2-543.
(2) a District Court commissioner appointed pursuant to
Article IV, §41G of the Maryland Constitution.
Cross reference: For the definition of "judicial appointee" for
purposes of filing a financial disclosure statement, see Rule 18604.
(b)
Member of Judicial Appointee's Family
"Member of judicial appointee's family" means a spouse,
domestic partner, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or
other relative or individual with whom the judicial appointee
maintains a close familial relationship.
(c)
Member of Judicial Appointee's Household
"Member of judicial appointee's household" means:
(1) if sharing the judicial appointee's legal residence, the
judicial appointee's spouse, domestic partner, child, ward,
financially dependent parent, or other financially dependent
relative; or
-112-
Rule 18-200.3
(2) the judicial appointee's spouse, domestic partner,
child, ward, parent, or other relative over whose financial
affairs the judicial appointee has legal or actual control.
(d)
Other Definitions
As to a judicial appointee, "domestic partner,"
"fiduciary," "gift," "impartial, impartiality, and impartially,"
"impending matter," "independence," "knowingly, knowledge, known,
and knows," "pending matter," "significant financial interest,"
and "third degree of relationship" have the meanings set forth,
respectively, in Rule 18-100.3 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g),
(j), (k), and (l) of the Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct.
Source: This Rule is derived from the Definitions Section of
former Rule 16-814 (2016).
-113-
Rule 18-201.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING INTEGRITY AND THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-201.1.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW
A judicial appointee shall comply with the law, including
the Rules in this Code of Conduct for Judicial Appointees that
are applicable.
Source:
(2016).
This Rule is derived from former Rule 1.1 of Rule 16-814
-114-
Rule 18-201.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING INTEGRITY AND THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-201.2.
(a)
PROMOTING CONFIDENCE IN THE JUDICIARY
A judicial appointee shall act at all times in a manner
that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity,
and impartiality of the judiciary.
(b)
A judicial appointee shall avoid conduct that would create
in reasonable minds a perception of impropriety.
COMMENT
[1] Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by
improper conduct and conduct that creates the appearance of
impropriety. This principle applies to both the professional and
personal conduct of a judicial appointee.
[2]
A judicial appointee should expect to be the subject
of public scrutiny that might be viewed as burdensome if applied
to other citizens, and must accept the restrictions imposed by
this Code.
[3] Conduct that compromises or appears to compromise the
independence, integrity, and impartiality of a judicial appointee
undermines public confidence in the judiciary. Because it is not
practicable to list all such conduct, the Rule is necessarily
cast in general terms.
[4] Judicial appointees should participate in activities
that promote ethical conduct among judicial appointees and
attorneys, support professionalism within the judiciary and the
legal profession, and promote access to justice for all.
[5] Actual improprieties include violations of law, court
rules, and this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is
whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception
that the judicial appointee's ability to carry out the
responsibilities of the judicial appointee's position with
competence, impartiality, and integrity is impaired.
-115-
Rule 18-201.2
[6] A judicial appointee should, where appropriate,
initiate and participate in community outreach activities for the
purpose of promoting public understanding of and confidence in
the administration of justice. In conducting such activities,
the judicial appointee must act in a manner consistent with this
Code.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 1.2 of Rule 16-814
(2016).
-116-
Rule 18-201.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING INTEGRITY AND THE AVOIDANCE OF IMPROPRIETY
Rule 18-201.3.
AVOIDING LENDING THE PRESTIGE OF THE POSITION
A judicial appointee shall not lend the prestige of the
judicial appointee's position to advance the personal or economic
interests of the judicial appointee or others, or allow others to
do so.
COMMENT
[1] It is improper for a judicial appointee to use or
attempt to use his or her position to gain personal advantage or
deferential treatment of any kind. For example, it would be
improper for a judicial appointee to allude to his or her
official status to gain favorable treatment in encounters with
traffic officials. Similarly, a judicial appointee must not use
an official letterhead to gain an advantage in conducting his or
her personal business.
[2] A judicial appointee may provide a reference or
recommendation for an individual based upon the judicial
appointee's personal knowledge. The judicial appointee may use
an official letterhead if the judicial appointee indicates that
the reference is personal and if there is no likelihood that the
use of the letterhead would reasonably be perceived as an attempt
to exert pressure by reason of the judicial appointee's
position.
[3] Judicial appointees may participate in the process of
judicial selection by cooperating with appointing authorities and
screening committees and by responding to inquiries from such
entities concerning the professional qualifications of an
individual being considered for judicial office.
Cross reference: See Rule 18-204.3.
[4] Special considerations arise when judicial appointees
write or contribute to publications of for-profit entities,
whether related or unrelated to the law. A judicial appointee
-117-
Rule 18-201.3
should not permit anyone associated with the publication of such
materials to exploit the judicial appointee's position in a
manner that violates this Rule or other applicable law. In
contracts for publication of a judicial appointee's writing, the
judicial appointee should retain sufficient control over the
advertising to avoid such exploitation.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 1.3 of Rule 16-814
(2016).
-118-
Rule 18-202.1
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A JUDICIAL APPOINTEE'S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.1.
GIVING PRECEDENCE TO THE DUTIES OF POSITION
The duties of the judicial appointee's position, as
prescribed by law and by the conditions and requirements imposed
by the appointing authority, shall take precedence over a
judicial appointee's personal and extra-official activities.
COMMENT
[1] To ensure that judicial appointees are available to
fulfill their official duties, judicial appointees must conduct
their personal and extra-official activities to minimize the risk
of conflicts that would result in frequent disqualification.
[2] Although it is not a duty of a judicial appointee's
position unless prescribed by law, judicial appointees are
encouraged to participate in activities that promote public
understanding of and confidence in the justice system.
[3] With respect to time devoted to personal and
extra-official activities, this Rule must be construed in a
reasonable manner. Family obligations, illnesses, emergencies,
and other permissible extra-official activities may require a
judicial appointee's immediate attention. Attending to those
obligations and situations, temporary in nature, is not
prohibited by this Rule and should be dealt with in accordance
with applicable vacation, sick leave, and administrative leave
policies. Judicial appointees must not permit their other
activities to interfere with their ability to perform the duties
of their public position.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.1 of Rule 16-814
(2016).
-119-
Rule 18-202.2
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A JUDICIAL APPOINTEE'S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.2.
IMPARTIALITY AND FAIRNESS
(a) A judicial appointee shall uphold and apply the law and
shall perform all duties of the position impartially and fairly.
(b) A judicial appointee may make reasonable efforts,
consistent with the Maryland Rules and other law, to facilitate
the ability of all litigants, including self-represented
litigants, to be fairly heard.
COMMENT
[1] To ensure impartiality and fairness to all parties, a
judicial appointee must be objective and open-minded.
[2] Although each judicial appointee comes to the position
with a unique background and personal philosophy, a judicial
appointee must interpret and apply the law without regard to
whether the judicial appointee approves or disapproves of the law
in question.
[3] When applying and interpreting the law, a judicial
appointee sometimes may make good-faith errors of fact or law.
Errors of this kind do not violate this Rule.
Cross reference:
See Rule 18-202.6 Comment [2].
Source: This Rule is derived in part from former Rule 2.2 of Rule
16-814 (2016) and is in part new.
-120-
Rule 18-202.3
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A JUDICIAL APPOINTEE'S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.3.
(a)
BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND HARASSMENT
A judicial appointee shall perform the duties of the
position, including administrative duties, without bias or
prejudice.
(b)
In the performance of the judicial appointee's duties, a
judicial appointee shall not, by words or conduct, manifest bias,
prejudice, or harassment based upon race, sex, gender, religion,
national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation,
marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation. A
judicial appointee shall require attorneys in proceedings before
the judicial appointee, court staff, court officials, and others
subject to the judicial appointee's direction and control to
refrain from similar conduct.
(c)
The restrictions of section (b) of this Rule do not
preclude judicial appointees or attorneys from making legitimate
references to the listed factors, or similar factors, when they
are relevant to an issue in a proceeding.
COMMENT
[1] A judicial appointee who manifests bias or prejudice in
a proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings
the judiciary into disrepute.
-121-
Rule 18-202.3
[2] A judicial appointee must avoid conduct that may
reasonably be perceived as prejudiced or biased. Examples of
manifestations of bias or prejudice include epithets, slurs,
demeaning nicknames, negative stereotyping, attempted humor based
upon stereotypes, threatening, intimidating, or hostile acts,
suggestions of connections between race, ethnicity, or
nationality and crime, and irrelevant references to personal
characteristics. Even facial expressions and body language can
convey to parties and attorneys in the proceeding, the media, and
others an appearance of bias or prejudice.
[3] Harassment, as referred to in section (b) of this Rule,
is verbal or physical conduct that denigrates or shows hostility
or aversion toward an individual on bases such as race, sex,
gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age,
sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or
political affiliation.
[4] Sexual harassment includes sexual advances, requests
for sexual favors, conduct of a sexual nature through the use of
electronic communication that alarms or seriously annoys another,
and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is
unwelcome.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.3 of Rule 16-814
(2016).
-122-
Rule 18-202.4
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A JUDICIAL APPOINTEE'S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.4.
(a)
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
A judicial appointee shall not be swayed by public clamor
or fear of criticism.
(b)
A judicial appointee shall not permit family, social,
political, financial, or other interests or relationships to
influence the judicial appointee's official conduct or judgment.
(c)
A judicial appointee shall not convey or permit others to
convey the impression that any person is in a position to
influence the judicial appointee.
COMMENT
[1] An independent judiciary requires that judicial
appointees decide matters according to the law and facts, without
regard to whether particular laws or litigants are popular or
unpopular with the public, the media, government officials, or
the judicial appointee's friends or family. Confidence in the
judiciary is eroded if a judicial appointee's decision-making is
perceived to be subject to inappropriate outside influences.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.4 of Rule 16-814
(2016).
-123-
Rule 18-202.5
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A JUDICIAL APPOINTEE'S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.5.
(a)
COMPETENCE, DILIGENCE, AND COOPERATION
A judicial appointee shall perform the duties of the
position competently, diligently, promptly, and without
favoritism or nepotism.
(b)
A judicial appointee shall cooperate with judges, other
judicial appointees of the court, and court officials in the
administration of court business.
(c)
A judicial appointee shall not wilfully fail to comply
with administrative rules or reasonable directives of a judge or
other judicial appointee with supervisory authority.
COMMENT
[1] Competence in the performance of a judicial appointee's
duties requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and
preparation reasonably necessary to perform the responsibilities
of the position.
[2] A judicial appointee should seek the necessary docket
time, court staff, expertise, and resources to discharge the
judicial appointee's responsibilities.
[3] Prompt disposition of the court's business requires a
judicial appointee to devote adequate time to the position in
accordance with the requirements imposed by the appointing
authority, to be punctual in attendance and expeditious in
determining matters under submission, and to take reasonable
measures to ensure that court officials, litigants, and their
attorneys cooperate with the judicial appointee to that end.
[4] In disposing of matters promptly and efficiently, a
judicial appointee must demonstrate due regard for the rights of
-124-
Rule 18-202.5
parties to be heard and to have issues resolved without
unnecessary cost or delay. A judicial appointee should monitor
and supervise cases in ways that reduce or eliminate dilatory
practices, avoidable delays, and unnecessary costs.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.5 of Rule 16-814
(2016).
-125-
Rule 18-202.6
MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE
TITLE 18 – JUDGES AND JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
CHAPTER 200 – MARYLAND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JUDICIAL APPOINTEES
RULES GOVERNING THE PERFORMANCE OF A JUDICIAL APPOINTEE'S DUTIES
Rule 18-202.6.
(a)
ENSURING THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD
A judicial appointee shall accord to every person who has
a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's attorney, the
right to be heard according to law.
(b)
A judicial appointee may encourage parties to a proceeding
and their attorneys to settle matters in dispute but shall not
act in a manner that coerces any party into settlement.
COMMENT
[1] The right to be heard is an essential component of a
fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive rights of
litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the
right to be heard are observed.
[2]
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.