Legal Opinion

Caudill v. Judicial Ethics Committee

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided February 18, 1999No. 97-SC-000856-OA, 97-SC-000870-OA and 97-SC-000893-OAPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRAVES, Justice.

This is a review of an opinion of the Judicial Ethics Committee pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 4.310(4). The question under consideration is whether Canon 3B(4) of the Judicial Code of Conduct prohibits a judge from hiring a relative. Circuit Judges Eddie C. Lovelace and Danny P. Caudill, and District Judge Stephen L. Bates all employ their spouses as secretaries or administrative assistants. Joyce Lovelace, Iris Caudill and Lynn Bates were hired as secretaries prior to the judges’ appointment to the bench, and each has not less than twelve years experience as a legal…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. New Mexico State Board of Education v. Board of Education of Alamogordo Public School District No. 1New Mexico Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Chapman v. GormanKentucky Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Opinion of the JusticesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1973
  4. State Ex Rel. Robinson v. KeefeSupreme Court of Florida · 1933

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  2. Miller v. City of Annapolis Historic Preservation CommissionCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  3. Pringle v. Montgomery County Planning Board M-NCPPCCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  4. Kentucky Registry of Election Finance v. BlevinsKentucky Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Caudill v. Judicial Ethics CommitteeKentucky Supreme Court · 1999

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API