Canon 3. A judge should perform the duties of his office impartially and diligently

Canons of Judicial Ethics

Canon 3.

A judge should perform the duties of his office impartially and diligently.

The judicial activities of a judge take precedence over his other activities. His

judicial duties include all the duties of his office prescribed by law. In the performance of

these duties, the following standards apply:

A. ADJUDICATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES:

(1) A judge should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in

it. He should be unswayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of

criticism.

(2) A judge should maintain order and decorum in proceedings before him.

(3) A judge should be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors,

witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom he deals in his official capacity, and

should require similar conduct of lawyers, and of his staff, court officials, and

others subject to his direction and control.

Commentary

The duty to hear all proceedings fairly and with patience is not inconsistent with the

duty to dispose promptly of the business of the court. Courts can be efficient and

business-like while being patient and deliberate.

(4) A judge should accord to every person who is legally interested in a proceeding,

or his lawyer, full right to be heard according to law, and, except as authorized

by law, neither initiate nor consider ex parte communications concerning a

pending or impending proceeding. A judge, however, may obtain the advice of

a disinterested and impartial expert on the law applicable to a proceeding

before him; provided however, a judge should use discretion in such cases and,

if the judge considers that justice would require it, should give notice to the

parties of the person consulted and the substance of the advice, and afford the

parties reasonable opportunity to respond.

ge, however, may obtain the advice of

a disinterested and impartial expert on the law applicable to a proceeding

before him; provided however, a judge should use discretion in such cases and,

if the judge considers that justice would require it, should give notice to the

parties of the person consulted and the substance of the advice, and afford the

parties reasonable opportunity to respond.

(5) A judge should dispose promptly of the business of the court, being ever mindful

of the cases or matters taken under submission or advisement. On the first day

of January and the first day of July of each year, each judge shall file a report

showing the cases or matters that have been under submission or advisement

for six months or longer, and if there has been no case or matter under

submission or advisement for six months or longer, the report shall so state.

When a case or matter has been under submission or advisement for six

months or longer, the report shall give the date that the case or matter was

taken under submission or advisement and the reasons for the failure of the

judge to decide the case or matter. Trial judges shall file their reports with the

Administrative Office of Courts, and appellate judges shall file their reports with

the clerk of their appellate court. A judge may either file a completed and signed

paper version of his or her report or complete and file his or her report

electronically and sign that report using an electronic signature pursuant to Rule

30(G), Ala. R. Jud. Admin.

Commentary

Prompt disposition of the court’s business requires a judge to devote adequate time

to his duties, to be punctual in attending court and expeditious in determining matters

under submission, and to insist that court officials, litigants and their lawyers cooperate

with him to that end.

d sign that report using an electronic signature pursuant to Rule

30(G), Ala. R. Jud. Admin.

Commentary

Prompt disposition of the court’s business requires a judge to devote adequate time

to his duties, to be punctual in attending court and expeditious in determining matters

under submission, and to insist that court officials, litigants and their lawyers cooperate

with him to that end.

(6) A judge should abstain from public comment that reasonably can be expected

to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a proceeding that the judge

knows or reasonably should know is pending or impending in any court in

Alabama.

Commentary to Canon 3.A(6) as Amended Effective July 1, 2019

Canon 3.A(6) balances the First Amendment rights of judges with the public

interest in the protection and preservation of public confidence in the integrity and

impartiality of Alabama's judiciary. Public discussion by judges of an issue of public

importance cannot be proscribed or punished under this Canon solely because the issue

may happen to be the subject of a pending or impending proceeding in any court,

especially courts outside Alabama. In addition, this Canon does not prohibit a judge from

making statements of an educational or informational nature about past decisions of any

court.

For purposes of this Canon, "impending" means imminent or expected to occur in

the near future. Additionally, a proceeding shall be deemed to be "impending in any court

in Alabama" when an action originated in a court in Alabama and is pending in an

appellate court with the possibility that there could be further proceedings in a court in

Alabama as a result of some action taken by the appellate court.

es of this Canon, "impending" means imminent or expected to occur in

the near future. Additionally, a proceeding shall be deemed to be "impending in any court

in Alabama" when an action originated in a court in Alabama and is pending in an

appellate court with the possibility that there could be further proceedings in a court in

Alabama as a result of some action taken by the appellate court.

(7) A trial judge or an appellate court should prohibit broadcasting or recording

courtroom proceedings or taking photographs in the courtroom unless the trial judge or

appellate court determines that such should be allowed in accordance with the provisions

of (7A) or (7B); however, a trial judge or an appellate court may, in the exercise of sound

discretion, authorize:

(a)

The use of electronic or photographic means for the

presentation of evidence, for the perpetuation of a record, or for other

purposes of judicial administration;

(b)

The broadcasting, televising, recording, or photographing of

investitive, ceremonial, or nonjudicial proceedings;

(c)

The photographic or electronic recording and reproduction of

appropriate court proceedings for instructional or educational purposes

under the following conditions:

(i)

The means of recording will not distract

participants or impair the dignity of the proceedings;

(ii)

The parties have consented, and the consent to

being depicted or recorded has been obtained from each

witness appearing in the recording and reproduction;

(iii)

The reproduction will not be exhibited until after

the proceedings have been concluded and all direct appeals

have been exhausted; and

of recording will not distract

participants or impair the dignity of the proceedings;

(ii)

The parties have consented, and the consent to

being depicted or recorded has been obtained from each

witness appearing in the recording and reproduction;

(iii)

The reproduction will not be exhibited until after

the proceedings have been concluded and all direct appeals

have been exhausted; and

(iv)

The reproduction will be exhibited only for

instructional or educational purposes.

The requirements and prohibitions of this Canon do not apply to an appellate court

using its own broadcasting and recording system to broadcast and record its proceedings.

(7A) A trial judge, in the exercise of sound discretion, may authorize the

broadcasting, televising, recording or taking of photographs in a courtroom

during a trial or other judicial hearing;

(a) Provided, the supreme court of Alabama has authorized a plan for the

courtroom in which the photographing, recording or broadcasting by radio

or television will occur. The authorized plan shall set forth the safeguards to

ensure that such photographing, recording or broadcasting by radio or

television of such proceedings will not detract from the dignity of the court

proceedings, distract any witness from giving testimony, degrade the court,

or otherwise interfere with the achievement of a fair trial and shall further

set forth the places where cameras, lights, wires and transmitting devices

may be located and other details, including, but not limited to, the area of

movement of media personnel. Prior to the supreme court’s approval of

such a plan, a petition shall have been filed with the supreme court signed

by the presiding judge of the circuit, the district attorney, president of the

local bar association and the chairman of the county commission, which

petition shall recommend safeguards and details designed to guarantee that

the photographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio will not

rt’s approval of

such a plan, a petition shall have been filed with the supreme court signed

by the presiding judge of the circuit, the district attorney, president of the

local bar association and the chairman of the county commission, which

petition shall recommend safeguards and details designed to guarantee that

the photographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio will not

(1) detract from the dignity of the court proceedings, (2) distract any witness

in giving testimony, (3) degrade the court, or (4) otherwise interfere with the

achievement of a fair trial.

(b) Provided further, if the case is a criminal proceeding, all accused persons

who will be before the court during any such photographing, recording or

broadcasting by television or radio, as well as the leading prosecuting

attorney representing the state or the city, shall have affirmatively given their

written consent to the photographing, recording or broadcasting by

television or radio.

(c) Provided further, if the case is a civil proceeding, all litigants involved in the

case and their respective leading attorneys shall have affirmatively given

their written consent to the photographing, recording or broadcasting by

television or radio.

However, the judge shall immediately suspend or stop any photographing,

recording or broadcasting by television or radio at any time that a witness who is testifying,

the parent or guardian of any testifying witness who is a minor, or a juror, party or attorney

expressly objects to the photographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio.

(7B) An appellate court may use its own broadcasting and recording system to

broadcast and record its proceedings for the purpose of making available to the public

such broadcasts or recordings. An appellate court may also authorize the broadcasting,

televising, recording, or taking of photographs in a courtroom during a judicial hearing:

g, recording or broadcasting by television or radio.

(7B) An appellate court may use its own broadcasting and recording system to

broadcast and record its proceedings for the purpose of making available to the public

such broadcasts or recordings. An appellate court may also authorize the broadcasting,

televising, recording, or taking of photographs in a courtroom during a judicial hearing:

(a) Provided, the Supreme Court of Alabama has

authorized a plan for the courtroom which shall contain

safeguards to ensure that the photographing, recording, or

broadcasting by television or radio shall not detract from the

dignity of the court proceedings, degrade the court, distract any

witness in giving testimony (if the case is one in which testimony

is received), or otherwise interfere with the achievement of a fair

and impartial hearing or trial, which plan shall set forth the

location where cameras, lights, wires and transmitting devices

may be located as well as other details, including the movement

area for media personnel. Prior to the Supreme Court's approval

of such a plan, a petition, signed by a majority of the members of

the appellate court, shall be filed with the Supreme Court.

(b) Provided further, that the attorneys involved in the

hearing or trial and the parties present shall have affirmatively

given their written consent.

However, the appellate court shall immediately suspend or stop any

photographing or recording or broadcasting by television or radio during any time

that any witness who is testifying, the parent or guardian of a testifying witness

who is a minor, an attorney, a party, or a judge expressly objects to such

photographing or recording or broadcasting by television or radio

their written consent.

However, the appellate court shall immediately suspend or stop any

photographing or recording or broadcasting by television or radio during any time

that any witness who is testifying, the parent or guardian of a testifying witness

who is a minor, an attorney, a party, or a judge expressly objects to such

photographing or recording or broadcasting by television or radio.

Commentary

“It is now universally recognized that the dignity of a church service is not affected

in any degree by photographing or broadcasting by television or radio of a church service

when sophisticated and advanced equipment and technology is used.” “Photographing or

broadcasting by television or radio of a church service will not distract any church

participant or degrade the solemnity of the service if sophisticated and advanced

technology is employed.”

The above-quoted statements were part of the persuasive arguments made to the

court at the hearing on the proposed canons of judicial ethics submitted by an advisory

committee. The court was impressed with the arguments that modern, sophisticated

equipment and technology are now available for broadcasting, televising, filming and

photographing, which will not interfere with or detract from the dignity of a fair and impartial

trial, and that instead of adopting absolute prohibitive language, the court should devise

a canon by which photographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio is

permissible if such modern, sophisticated equipment and technology are used along with

safeguards designed to prevent any interferences with the achievement of a fair and

impartial trial.

In deliberating this canon, the court considered the First Amendment protection of

the press, and the constitutional guarantees of a fair trial

tographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio is

permissible if such modern, sophisticated equipment and technology are used along with

safeguards designed to prevent any interferences with the achievement of a fair and

impartial trial.

In deliberating this canon, the court considered the First Amendment protection of

the press, and the constitutional guarantees of a fair trial. Rather than deciding to

completely prohibit all broadcasting, filming, recording, televising, and photographing the

court has devised a system which would allow, under limited circumstances, the use of

sophisticated equipment and advanced technology in photographing, filming, televising,

recording and broadcasting of court proceedings.

The canon still vests in the trial judge the final decision as to whether or not

photographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio will be allowed. It

authorizes the trial judge, in the exercise of his sound discretion, to allow photographing,

recording or broadcasting by television or radio if the Supreme Court has authorized a

plan for the courtroom after a petition has been filed with the Supreme Court, signed by

the presiding circuit judge, district attorney, local bar association president, and chairman

of the county governing body. It is contemplated that the plan approved by the Supreme

Court will provide safeguards to ensure that such activities by the media shall not detract

from the dignity of the court proceedings, distract any witness from giving testimony,

degrade the court, or otherwise interfere with the achievement of a fair trial. The plan will

association president, and chairman

of the county governing body. It is contemplated that the plan approved by the Supreme

Court will provide safeguards to ensure that such activities by the media shall not detract

from the dignity of the court proceedings, distract any witness from giving testimony,

degrade the court, or otherwise interfere with the achievement of a fair trial. The plan will

set forth places where the cameras, lights, wires and transmitting devices may be located

and describe the sophisticated equipment and advanced technology to be employed.

Even if the Supreme Court approves such a plan and the trial judge is willing to

allow such photographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio in accordance

with said plan, nevertheless, there are further requirements, including acquisition of the

advance written consent of parties and attorneys, that must be met.

The canon provides a further safeguard in that witnesses, jurors, parties or

attorneys may, at any time, suspend or stop any photographing, recording or broadcasting

by television or radio by expressly objecting to the same.

Language in the proposed canon which would prohibit broadcasting, televising,

recording or photographing in areas immediately adjacent to the courtroom was deleted.

The canon allows photographing, recording or broadcasting by television or radio

in an appellate court under similar circumstances. See (7B).

The provisions of (7) place within the sound discretion of the trial judge or the

appellate court the decision as to whether or not photographing, recording and

broadcasting by television and radio will be allowed under the circumstances and

situations outlined in its provisions. The prior approval of a plan by the Supreme Court is

not required.

B. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES:

(7B).

The provisions of (7) place within the sound discretion of the trial judge or the

appellate court the decision as to whether or not photographing, recording and

broadcasting by television and radio will be allowed under the circumstances and

situations outlined in its provisions. The prior approval of a plan by the Supreme Court is

not required.

B. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES:

(1) A judge should diligently discharge his administrative responsibilities, maintain

professional competence in judicial administration, and facilitate the

performance of the administrative responsibilities of other judges and court

officials.

(2) A judge should require his staff and court officials subject to his direction and

control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to him.

(3) A judge should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against a

judge or lawyer for unprofessional conduct of which the judge has personal

knowledge.

Commentary

Disciplinary measures may include reporting a lawyer’s misconduct to an

appropriate disciplinary body.

(4) A judge should not make unnecessary appointments. He should exercise his

power of appointment only on the basis of merit, avoiding nepotism and

favoritism. He should not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair

value of services rendered. He should consider himself the conservator of all

estates under his jurisdiction.

Commentary

Appointees of the judge include officials such as referees, commissioners, special

masters, receivers, 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 this subsection.

C. DISQUALIFICATION:

(1) A judge should disqualify himself in a proceeding in which his disqualification is

required by law or his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including

but not limited to instances where:

etaries, and bailiffs.

Consent by the parties to an appointment or an award of compensation does not relieve

the judge of the obligation prescribed by this subsection.

C. DISQUALIFICATION:

(1) A judge should disqualify himself in a proceeding in which his disqualification is

required by law or his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including

but not limited to instances where:

(a) He has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal

knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;

(b) He served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom

he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer in

the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness

concerning it.

Commentary

A lawyer in a governmental agency does not necessarily have an association with

other lawyers employed by that agency within the meaning of this subsection; a judge

formerly employed by a governmental agency, however, should disqualify himself in a

proceeding if his impartiality might reasonably be questioned because of such

association.

(c) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child

residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in

controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could

be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(d) He or his spouse, or a person within the fourth degree of relationship to

either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

lly or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child

residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in

controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could

be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(d) He or his spouse, or a person within the fourth degree of relationship to

either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

(i) Is named a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a

party;

Commentary

The fact that a lawyer in a proceeding is affiliated with a law firm with which a

lawyer-relative of the judge is affiliated does not of itself disqualify the judge. Under

appropriate circumstances, the fact that “his impartiality might be reasonably questioned”

under Canon 3C(1), or that the lawyer-relative is known by the judge to have an interest

in the law firm that could be “substantially affected by the outcome of the proceedings”

under Canon 3C(1)(d)(ii) may require his disqualification.

(ii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially

affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(iii) Is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the

proceeding;

(2) A judge should inform himself about his personal and fiduciary financial

interests and should make a reasonable effort to inform himself about the

personal financial interests of his spouse and minor children residing in his

household.

(3) For the purposes of this section:

(a) The degree of relationship is calculated according to the civil law system;

(b) “Fiduciary” includes such relationships as executor, administrator, trustee,

and guardian;

(c) “Financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, or a

relationship as officer, director, advisor, or other active participant in the

affairs of a party, except that:

ses of this section:

(a) The degree of relationship is calculated according to the civil law system;

(b) “Fiduciary” includes such relationships as executor, administrator, trustee,

and guardian;

(c) “Financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, or a

relationship as officer, director, advisor, or other active participant in the

affairs of a party, except that:

(i) Ownership in a mutual or common investment fund that holds securities

is not a “financial interest” in securities held by the organization or

institution;

(ii) An office in an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic

organization or institution is not a “financial interest” in securities held by

the organization or institution;

(iii) The proprietary interest of a policyholder in a mutual insurance

company, or a depositor in a mutual savings association, or a similar

proprietary interest is a “financial interest” in the organization only if the

outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the

interest;

(iv) Ownership of government securities is a “financial interest” in the issuer

only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value

of the securities;

(v) Ownership of a de minimis portion of the securities of a publicly traded

corporation is not a “financial interest.” A “de minimis” portion is an

interest that could not raise a reasonable question as to a judge’s

impartiality.

Commentary to Canon 3.C.(3)(C) as Amended

Effective October 1, 1999

A judge may hold securities of a publicly traded corporation and not be considered

to hold a “financial interest” in the corporation that would require the judge’s

disqualification if the interest the judge holds is considered de minimis.

D. REMITTAL OF DISQUALIFICATION. A judge disqualified by the terms of Canon 3C(1)(c) or

Canon 3C(1)(d) may, instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose in the record

the basis of his disqualification

ration and not be considered

to hold a “financial interest” in the corporation that would require the judge’s

disqualification if the interest the judge holds is considered de minimis.

D. REMITTAL OF DISQUALIFICATION. A judge disqualified by the terms of Canon 3C(1)(c) or

Canon 3C(1)(d) may, instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose in the record

the basis of his disqualification. If based on such disclosure, the parties and lawyers,

independently of the judge’s participation, all agree in writing that the judge’s relationship

is immaterial or that his financial interest is insubstantial, the judge is no longer

disqualified, and may participate in the proceeding. The agreement signed by all parties

and lawyers shall be incorporated in the record of the proceeding.

Commentary

This procedure is designed to minimize the chance that a party will feel coerced

into an agreement. When a party is not immediately available, the judge without violating

this section may proceed on the written assurance of the lawyer that his party’s consent

will be subsequently filed.

E. DISCLOSURE OF OTHER INTERESTS OR RELATIONSHIPS: A judge who does not deem

himself or herself disqualified from a proceeding by the terms of Canon 3.C. may

nonetheless make information concerning interests or relationships available, either by

filing that information in the office of the clerk of the judge’s court or by causing notice to

be given to the parties to the proceeding. It shall be the duty of the parties to familiarize

themselves with any materials available for inspection in the clerk’s office.

[Amended 3-27-78, eff. 5-1-78; amended 6-5-79, eff. 7-2-79; amended 7-28-99, eff. 101-

99; Amended 7-1-2019, Amended 6-12-2024.]

Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Canon 3.C. and

adopting Canon 3.E., effective October 1, 1999, is published in that volume of Alabama

Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 737 So.2d

als available for inspection in the clerk’s office.

[Amended 3-27-78, eff. 5-1-78; amended 6-5-79, eff. 7-2-79; amended 7-28-99, eff. 101-

99; Amended 7-1-2019, Amended 6-12-2024.]

Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Canon 3.C. and

adopting Canon 3.E., effective October 1, 1999, is published in that volume of Alabama

Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 737 So.2d.

Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending the Commentary to

Canon 1, the Commentary to Canon 2, Canon 3.A(6), and the Commentary to Cannon

3.A(6), Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, effective July 1, 2019, is published in that

volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from __ So. 3d.

Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Canon 3.A(7) and

Canon 3.A(7B), Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, and amending the Media Coverage

Plan of the Supreme Court of Alabama, effective April 3, 2023, is published in that volume

of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from __ So. 3d.

Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Canon 3.A(5) and

Canon 6.C., Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, effective June 12, 2024, is published in

that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from __ So. 3d.