Also known as: extrajudicial activity · extrajudicial conduct
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Activities undertaken by a judge apart from the performance of official judicial duties. Such activities remain subject to the requirement that judicial responsibilities always take precedence and must not interfere with the proper performance of those duties or create an appearance of impropriety.
Emma Erickson, a part-time trial judge, also maintains a clinical nursing practice at the local hospital. During a high-profile malpractice trial involving Evergreen Bank, she repeatedly reschedules pretrial hearings and continues the trial date twice to accommodate her patient appointments. The parties move for recusal, arguing that the scheduling disruptions show her outside work has displaced judicial responsibilities.
Ezra Eastman, a superior court judge assigned to defamation cases, accepts a paid role as a cable news legal analyst. He cancels afternoon sessions and departs early for studio segments, resulting in four postponed motion hearings in a case where the network is a defendant. The plaintiff moves for recusal on the ground that the outside commitments have dictated the pace of the litigation.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A judge violates the requirement when outside activities cause repeated scheduling disruptions, continuances, or rushed proceedings in pending cases. The rule focuses on whether the judge's own performance of judicial responsibilities is subordinated to the extrajudicial schedule rather than on whether colleagues cover some duties or whether the judge ultimately decides the cases fairly.
Supporting sources
A judge may maintain outside business activities only when those activities do not cause recurring delays, rushed hearings, or docket backlogs. When the judge routinely recesses court early or reschedules matters to accommodate business hours, the conduct is improper because judicial duties have not been given priority.
Supporting sources
Disclosure and weekend scheduling do not cure a violation when the record shows concrete postponements of hearings and trials during regular court hours. The test is whether judicial duties have actually taken precedence in practice, not whether the judge intended to give them priority or offered to recuse in future cases.
Supporting sources