W. Va. Code of Jud. Conduct R. 2.15

History

COMMENT [1] Taking action to address known misconduct is a judge's obligation. Paragraphs (A) and (B) impose an obligation on the judge to report to the appropriate disciplinary authority the known misconduct of another judge or a lawyer that raises a substantial question regarding the honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness of that judge or lawyer. Ignoring or denying known misconduct among one's judicial colleagues or members of the legal profession undermines a judge's responsibility to participate in efforts to ensure public respect for the justice system. This Rule limits the reporting obligation to those offenses that an independent judiciary must vigorously endeavor to prevent. [2] A judge who has knowledge indicating a substantial likelihood of misconduct by another judge or lawyer is required to take appropriate action under paragraphs (C) and (D). Appropriate action may include, but is not limited to, communicating directly with the judge who may have violated this Code, communicating with a supervising judge, or reporting the suspected violation to the appropriate authority or other agency or body. Similarly, actions to be taken in response to information indicating that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct may include but are not limited to communicating directly with the lawyer who may have committed the violation, or reporting the suspected violation to the appropriate authority or other agency or body. Clerk's Notes on Rule 2.15 Rule 2.15 and its Comment are based on the Model Code with the exception of subsection (C) and (D), which uses the phrase “a judge having knowledge indicating a substantial likelihood.” rather than the phrase in the Model Code “a judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood.” The language of Comment [2] was also modified for consistency.