Ga. Code. Jud. Cond. 3.13
When the source has interests before the judge as a party or other person, including a lawyer, who has come or is likely to come before the court, the judge may accept a gift or similar benefit that does not exceed $100 in value, unless prohibited by Rule 3.13 (A). If the same source provides gifts or similar benefits exceeding, in the aggregate, $500 in the same calendar year, the acceptance of all of those gifts or similar benefits must be reported under Rule 3.15.
When the source does not have interests before the judge as a party or other person, including a lawyer, who has come or is likely to come before the court, the judge may accept a gift or similar benefit, unless prohibited by Rule 3.13 (A). If the same source provides gifts or similar benefits exceeding, in the aggregate, $500 in the same calendar year, the acceptance of all of those gifts or similar benefits must be reported under Rule 3.15.
Except where prohibited by Rule 3.13 (A) and notwithstanding Rule 3.13 (B) and (C), judges may accept the following without reporting such acceptance:
Commentary:
[1] For purposes of this Rule, "gifts or similar benefits" includes any gift, bequest, benefit, favor, loan, or other thing of value, including such things as travel; lodging; meals; golf, hunting, and other recreational activities; and tickets to sporting, entertainment, and charitable events. The value of such tickets is the face value of the ticket or, in the case of tickets to charitable events, the value of goods and services provided in exchange for the charitable contribution (i.e., the non-tax-deductible portion of the contribution).
[2] This Rule does not apply to contributions to a judge's campaign for judicial office, a matter governed by Canon 4.
[3] In dealing with gifts or similar benefits, judges must distinguish among things that can never be accepted, see Rule 3.13 (A); things for which acceptance, limits, and reporting requirements depend on whether the source has interests before the judge, see Rule 3.13 (B) or does not have such interests, see Rule 3.13 (C); and things that generally may be accepted and do not require reporting, see Rule 3.13 (D).
[4] Rule 3.13 applies only to the acceptance of gifts or similar benefits by a judge. Nonetheless, if a gift or similar benefit is given to someone in the judge's family, it may be viewed as an attempt to evade Rule 3.13 and to influence the judge indirectly and may require the judge's disqualification under the general provisions of Rule 2.11 (A). Where the gift or similar benefit is provided primarily to such other person and the judge is at most an incidental beneficiary, this concern is reduced. A judge should, however, remind family members of the restrictions imposed upon judges, and urge them to take these restrictions into account when making decisions about accepting gifts or similar benefits.
[5] Whenever a judge accepts a gift or similar benefit without paying fair market value, there is a risk that the benefit might be viewed as intended to influence the judge's decision in a case. Rule 3.13 imposes restrictions upon the acceptance and reporting of such benefits according to the magnitude of the risk. Rule 3.13 (D) identifies circumstances in which the risk is low that the acceptance would appear to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality, and explicitly provides that such items need not be publicly reported.
[6] Gift-giving between friends and relatives is a common occurrence and ordinarily does not create an appearance of impropriety or cause reasonable persons to believe that the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality has been compromised. In addition, when the appearance of friends or relatives in a case would require the judge's disqualification under Rule 2.11, there would be no opportunity for a gift to influence the judge's decision-making. Rule 3.13 (D) places no restrictions upon the ability of a judge to accept gifts or other things of value from friends or relatives under these circumstances and does not require reporting.
[7] Businesses and financial institutions frequently make available special pricing, discounts, and other benefits, either in connection with a temporary promotion or for preferred customers, based upon longevity of the relationship, volume of business transacted, and other factors. A judge may freely accept such benefits if they are available to the general public, or if the judge qualifies for the special price or discount according to the same criteria as are applied to persons who are not judges. As an example, loans provided at generally prevailing interest rates are not gifts, but a judge could not accept a loan from a financial institution at below-market interest rates unless the same rate was being made available to the general public for a certain period of time or only to borrowers with specified qualifications that the judge also possesses.
[8] Georgia judges have traditionally participated in numerous barrelated functions and in a wide variety of educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, and civic activities. The sponsors of such events frequently waive registration and other fees associated with the events, and sometimes reimburse necessary travel, food, lodging, and incidental expenses, to allow and encourage judges to participate. Such participation by judges in the legal community and the general community is encouraged, and reporting of invitations to such events and public testimonials to judges at such events is not required because it could discourage these activities. However, before accepting such an invitation or testimonial, a judge should consider all of the circumstances that may make the acceptance, individually or when viewed in relation to other accepted invitations and testimonials, appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality and thus to require disqualification under Rule 3.13 (A) (2). These factors may include: whether the costs of the event are reasonable and comparable to those associated with similar events sponsored by the judiciary, bar associations, or similar groups; whether the event is primarily educational rather than recreational; whether the sponsor is an educational institution or bar association rather than a trade association or for-profit entity; whether the funding for the event comes largely from numerous contributors rather than from a single entity; whether the sponsor or source of funding is generally associated with particular parties or interests currently appearing or likely to appear in the judge's court; whether differing viewpoints are presented; and whether a broad range of judicial and, if not a legal event, non-judicial participants are invited, whether a large number of participants are invited, and whether the program is designed specifically for judges.
Ga. Code. Jud. Cond. 3.13