Sending letters to beneficiaries of a trust is a proper way for a judge to determine if they object to the payment of a reasonable fee for the judge’s services as a personal representative and trustee, the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee has concluded.

The April 1 opinion, No. 2024-03, notes that the inquiring judge was named personal representative and successor trustee of a trust in the judge’s stepfather’s will — and that the judge does not believe that service will interfere with judicial duties.

Cannon 5E(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits a judge from serving as executor, administrator, or other personal representative, trustee, guardian, or attorney in fact or other fiduciary, “except for the estate, trust or person of a member of the judge’s family, and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties.”