Ky. R. Sup. Ct., IV, r. SCR 4.300, Application, I

As amended through November 7, 2024

Applicability of This Code

(A)The provisions of the Code apply to all full-time judges. Parts II through IV of this section identify provisions that apply to three distinct categories of part-time judges, including judicial officers, only while they are serving as judges, and provisions that do not apply to part-time judges/judicial officers at any time. All other Rules are therefore applicable to part-time judges/judicial officers at all times. The three categories of judicial service in other than a full-time capacity are necessarily defined in general terms because of the widely varying forms of judicial service. Canon 4 applies to judicial candidates.

(B)A judge, within the meaning of this Code, is anyone who is authorized to perform judicial functions, including a judicial officer as provided in Parts II through IV of this section, such as a court commissioner.

Ky. R. Sup. Ct., IV, r. SCR 4.300, Application, I

Amended by Order 2018-17, eff. 11/29/2018; adopted by Order 2018-04, eff. 1/31/2018.

COMMENT

[1] The Rules in this Code have been formulated to address the ethical obligations of any person who serves a judicial function, and are premised upon the supposition that a uniform system of ethical principles should apply to all those authorized to perform judicial functions.

[2] The determination of which category and, accordingly, which specific Rules apply to an individual judicial officer, depends upon the facts of the particular judicial service.

[3] In recent years many jurisdictions have created what are often called "specialty" or "problem solving" courts, in which judges are authorized by court rules to act in nontraditional ways. Judges presiding in drug courts and monitoring the progress of participants in those courts' programs may be authorized and even encouraged to communicate directly with social workers, probation officers, and others outside the context of their usual judicial role as independent decision makers on issues of fact and law. Such conduct may be permissible under applicable law* and not in violation of this Code. See, e.g., Rule 2.9, Comment [4].