Also known as: prejudice to the administration of justice · administration of justice prejudice
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
Conduct by a lawyer that interferes with the fair and orderly functioning of judicial proceedings or undermines public confidence in the legal system.
Pierre Poulin represents a client in a high-profile civil defamation suit. The judge orders detailed juror questionnaires sealed. Poulin secretly emails the questionnaires to a blogger and asks the blogger to publish commentary pressuring certain jurors to seek excusal. Disciplinary authorities learn of the leak.
A sitting judge engages in voluntary illegal drug use despite efforts at treatment and is chronically unavailable for court duties. The conduct leads to removal proceedings. The judge's actions demonstrate a lack of fitness that erodes public trust in the courts.
No. The rule reaches attempts to corrupt or manipulate court processes even if the effort fails or produces no tangible effect on the outcome.
Supporting sources
No. The prohibition covers conduct in any tribunal, including civil proceedings, that undermines jury selection, discovery, or courtroom order.
Supporting sources
Yes. The attempt itself to enlist court staff in derailing a motion constitutes conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice regardless of whether the clerk complies.
Supporting sources
No. Minor lapses in civility or intemperate language do not rise to the level of professional misconduct absent a tendency to impair the integrity of the judicial process.
Supporting sources
Yes. Coordinated efforts to inject partisan theatrics into proceedings after a judicial warning interfere with courtroom decorum and the neutral evaluation of evidence.
Supporting sources