QUESTION: What is a judge's ethical obligation upon receiving from a litigant a letter which attempts to communicate privately to the judge information concerning a case that is or has been pending.

ANSWER: Canon 3A(5) provides that a judge shall not permit or consider improper ex parte or other private communication concerning the merits of a pending or impending judicial proceeding. (Canon -10 provides that the word "shall" when used in the Code means compulsion.) Judges may comply with Canon 3A(5) by doing the following: 1) Preserve the original letter by delivering it to the court clerk to be file marked and kept in the clerk's file. 2) Send a copy of the letter to all opposing counsel and pro se litigants. 3) Read the letter to determine if it is proper or improper; if improper, the judge should send a letter to the communicant, with a copy of the judge's letter to all opposing counsel and pro se litigants, stating that the letter was an improper ex parte communication, that such communication should cease, that the judge will take no action whatsoever in response to the letter, and that a copy of the letter has been sent to all opposing counsel and pro se litigants.

Canon 3A(4) provides that a judge shall accord to every person who is legally interested in a proceeding the right to be heard according to law. Consideration of an ex parte communication would be inconsistent with Canon 3A(4), because it would not accord to other parties fair notice of the content of the communication, and it would not accord to other parties an opportunity to respond.

Canon 3 provides that the judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge's other activities. A judge's consideration of a controversy that is not brought before the court in the manner provided by law would be inconsistent with the judicial duty to determine "cases" and "controversies" (Art. 3, Constitution of the United States). A judge has no authority or jurisdiction to consider, or to take any action concerning, out-of-court controversies. A judge's consideration of a controversy that is not properly before the court could give the appearance of inappropriate action under color of judicial authority, which would tend to diminish public confidence in the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, rather than promote it as Canon 1 and Canon 2 require a judge to do.

Finally, a judge should try to minimize the number of cases in which the judge is disqualified. If a judge permits a communication to the judge concerning any matter that may be the subject of a judicial proceeding, that could necessitate disqualification or recusal.