Historically, there was little question of how a former judge should refer to herself. When a judge’s career on the bench was over, it was due to one of three causes: Retirement, death or disgrace. One joined the judiciary as the crowning glory of a distinguished career in the law. Ah, but that was way back when.
Today, as kid prosecutors become judges as part of their career path, something that I’ve taken issue with in the past, and as judicial salaries fail to cover college tuition bills, something is happening today that was never part of the deal before: Judges are leaving the bench to return to private practice as (ahem) ordinary lawyers.
According to the New York Lawyer, this has created an identification issue:
In canvassing a number of former judges across Pennsylvania, it seems the scales are balanced in terms of those who still use the title in their Web biographies or phone messages and those who do not.
And, admittedly, it is a confusing issue with no clear rule that refers to former judges and titles. The Code of Judicial Conduct is worded for sitting judges, and the state’s Rules of Professional Conduct generally point to attorneys without referencing judges specifically.
While others may refer to former judges by using a courtesy title, the question of whether the former judges may hold themselves out as “Judge Jones” to clients is another matter. Some use “judge” all over the place, on their voicemail, in their pleadings, on their letterhead and in the faux wood-grain nameplate on their desk.
I’ve always referred to ex-judges by using their title as a matter of courtesy, unless they are personal friends in which case I may not be very formal at all. But for the former judges to promote themselves as if they are entitled to quit the job and enjoy the perks forever is another matter.
Once you’ve stepped off the bench and into the well, you’re not “judge” anymore. You’re one of us again, trench lawyers fighting for a client like anybody else. How pretentious, how pompous, how wrong, to refer to yourself as “judge” when you’re not. It’s a flagrant commercialization of the position, using it as a lawyer to suggest having an “inside track” which you know to be nonsense, and trying to sell the title to promote yourself. Aren’t you embarrassed by doing this?
Unfortunately, there are no real rules about this.
Joseph A. Massa Jr. is chief counsel of the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board. Speaking only for himself, Massa said he would point to Canon 2(b) of the Code of Judicial Conduct as to the rule governing the issue of former judges retaining titles. The rule states that judges “should not lend the prestige of their office to advance the private interests of others; nor should they convey or knowingly permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.”
So that suggests that former judges, who should be expected to conduct themselves with some small recognition of right and wrong, will act accordingly?
Even if the rules were interpreted to mean former judges should refrain from using the title, the judicial and attorney disciplinary boards haven’t gone after anyone for the infraction and some say that wouldn’t be a priority compared to other potential egregious acts.
While this isn’t the most pressing concern of the bench and bar, it wouldn’t take much to clarify the rules and end this clearly inappropriate usage. Given the trend toward judges returning to private practice, it’s likely to be a growing problem. Let’s nip this one in the bud.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Application of mootness doctrine: As a general rule, I refer to members of the robe-wearing class as simple “Judge.” “Your Honor” is a little too much of an affectation. Hence, when a person leaves the bench, they are no longer “Judge so-and-so.” This may beg the question you raise, but “Your Honor” and such clutter as “May It Please the Court” should be banished from lawyerspeak.
You are so anti-establishment. Say, do you wear one of those Gerry Spence fringed jackets too?
No. I went to school in New York City. I am too urbane and sophisticated, although not urbane and sophisticated enough to remain there.
I just looked up “urbane” in my Funk & Wagnalls, and there it was, a picture of you.
Judges and Justices also continue to use their “Judge” and “Your Honor” titles when they enter the mediation and arbitration fields, which aren’t always governed by the Bar. In California, the Bar decided these retired judges had to pay Bar dues, which made them attorneys and “technically” not judges. This means they have to get insurance and the rest. They can’t have it both ways, can they?
“Madam Arbitrator.”
Instead of calling the judge “your honor”, why not “your majesty” It seems silly in todays day and age to refer to a public servant as your honor!
Some judges may feel it is a sense of entitlement, such as doctor..
When a Physician is no longer active, do they still get to keep their title?
Dr. so-and-so…
Yes, so judges could feel the same sense of ownership
The title of Doctor comes by virtue of a degree. Whether they perform the duties or not, they still possess the degree. The title of Judge comes by virtue of a position. It’s only valid as long as they hold the position. After that, it’s purely a matter of courtesy. While former judges may enjoy the same “sense of ownership,” they clearly don’t have the entitlement that a degree confers.