STATE OF NEVADA
STANDING COMMITTEE ON
JUDICIAL ETHICS AND ELECTION PRACTICES

DATED:     May 22, 2007                                                                     OPINION:  JE07-006


PROPRIETY OF A FULL-TIME COURT MASTER APPOINTED UNDER N.R.S. 3.405 ALSO SERVING AS A CONTINUING PART-TIME JUSTICE OF THE PEACE.
 

ISSUE

May a full-time district court master appointed pursuant to N.R.S. 3.045 also serve as a continuing part-time justice of the peace?
 

ANSWER

Yes.
 

FACTS

A judge inquires whether a full-time district court master appointed pursuant to N.R.S. 3.405 may also act as a continuing part-time justice of the peace. The full-time master is described as a family law and juvenile court master who makes findings and recommendations, primarily on child support, juvenile delinquency cases, in matters brought under N.R.S. 432B, and on applications for temporary orders for protection against domestic violence. The full-time district court master serves in the same judicial district in which the master would serve as a continuing part-time justice of the peace. The person performing these functions may not have taken and completed courses under N.R.S. 4.035 and N.R.S. 4.036.
 

DISCUSSION

The Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct applies to any officer of a judicial system who performs judicial functions, including an officer such as special master. See, Application of Code of Judicial Conduct, A. The Code also applies, with certain exceptions, to a continuing part-time judge. See, Application of Code of Judicial Conduct, C.

The Committee finds nothing in the Code that makes it impermissible for a full-time master to also act as a continuing part-time judge. The Committee notes, however, that in so functioning, the master should be cognizant of Canon 3A, which provides that the master's judicial duties take precedence over all of his or her other activities. In addition, the master should also be cognizant of the possibility that he or she may acquire information in the master's role which may relate to a proceeding which may arise in justice court. See, e.g., Advisory Opinion JE06-009, August 17, 2006; and Canon 3E(1)(a).

The circumstances here are distinguishable from those which gave rise to Advisory Opinion JE06-018. In Advisory Opinion JE 06-018, the Committee determined that a district court staff attorney who functioned on a multi-year basis as a law clerk for a judge, could not also act as a temporary family court master where his or her findings and recommendations would be reviewed by the judge who directed and supervised the staff attorney in the law clerk role. In that opinion, the Committee was concerned with the provisions of Canon 2 and Canon 3B(7), and the perceptions created by the judge and staff attorney relationship, on the one hand, and the master and reviewing judge function, on the other hand. The situation here is different because the relationship between the district judge or judges and the person performing the full-time court master and the continuing part-time justice of the peace functions, are the same in both situations. The district court judge or judges review the determinations by the master and the continuing part-time judge in both situations. There is no consulting relationship as existed in the previous opinion with the judge and staff attorney relationship.
 

CONCLUSION

It is, therefore, the opinion of the Committee that under the facts presented, a full-time district court master appointed under N.R.S. 3.405 may serve as a continuing part-time justice of the peace. The Committee also notes that the full-time district court master and the continuing part-time judge must comply with the law. To the extent that N.R.S. 4.035 and N.R.S. 4.036 require a continuing part-time judge to take and complete such courses prior to acting in that role, the continuing part-time judge must comply. However, it is not the function of this Committee to determine whether those provisions actually require the taking of such courses in order to perform the activities of a continuing part-time judge.
 

REFERENCES

Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct, Application of Code of Judicial Conduct, A, C; Canon 2; Canon 3B(7); Canon 3E.(1)(a); N.R.S. 3.405; N.R.S. 4.035; N.R.S. 4.036; N.R.S. 432B; Advisory Opinion JE06-009, August 17, 2006; Advisory Opinion JE06-018.
 

__________________

This opinion is issued by the Standing Committee on Judicial Ethics and Election Practices.  It is advisory only.  It is not binding upon the courts, the State Bar of Nevada, the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline, any person or tribunal charged with regulatory responsibilities, any member of the Nevada judiciary, or any person or entity which requested the opinion.
 

_______________________
Gordon H. DePaoli, Esq.
Committee Chairman
 

 


Last Updated: 05/22/07 12:31:23 PM