Bindinglaw

US · rules

D. Kan. Rule 83.2.5

Conflicts Involving Spouses and Children of Judges

activein force · 2023-01-04 – presentact-effective-date

The following rule is designed to give guidance to parties and attorneys regarding the

potential disqualification of a judge in a case involving the children and/or spouse of the judge.

For purposes of this rule, the term “spouse” includes a person other than a spouse who maintains

both a household and intimate relationship with the judge or child.

A judge of the court will be disqualified if the judge’s spouse, child, or a spouse of a child

is:

(a) a party in a case;

(b) likely to be a material witness in a case (to the judge’s knowledge);

(c) an attorney involved in the case; or

(d) has an ownership interest in a law firm to come before the court.

In other situations involving a judge’s spouse, child or child’s spouse, a judge is not deemed

subject to a conflict of interest and will not recuse unless additional aggravating factors warranting

recusal are present. Mere employment of a spouse, child, or child’s spouse by a law firm does not

mandate that the judge per se recuse from every matter in which the law firm is involved. For

example, the court would expect law firms to take reasonable steps to “wall off” any judge’s

spouse, child or child’s spouse from working on or being privy to information about any cases

pending before that judge for additional protection from a conflict. Additional aggravating factors

and/or other relatives who might present potential conflicts will be individually considered

pursuant to the applicable canons, advisory opinions, and case law.

* * *

Adopted 3/17/09 (formerly D. Kan. S.O. 08-2).

Provenance

Source
www.ksd.uscourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-18
Edition
fed-district-2026-09-19
Content hash
8c475dceaa3c4b95d30de20097c9bd4a855959181b48b52c6bb7d9b2715960ee
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.