Canon 7 New Jersey Rules of Court, Canon 7: Part 1 Appendix (CCJE): Canon 7, rendered as code with every cross-reference linked

rule Canon 7 "Part 1 Appendix (CCJE): Canon 7" {
Canon 7 -- Nepotism
(A) All personnel transactions, including but not limited to selection, appointment, promotion, transfer, and assignment of judiciary employees, shall be based on bona fide work-related factors and shall not be based on personal relationships or on any form of favoritism.
Comment: The same standards that apply to the hiring of employees, as they relate to conflicts of interest or to appearances of conflict, apply to personnel actions other than hiring. Although hiring is of prime importance, this Canon is universal in application to all personnel transactions, e.g., appointment, promotion, and transfer. The use of the term "personal relationships" is intentional, so as to encompass relationships outside the commonly used definition of family.
(B) This Canon shall apply to personnel actions taken by all State, county, and municipal judiciary employees.
Comment: This Canon applies to all judiciary employees. When an issue of conflict or appearance of conflict arises, restrictions cannot be limited to situations involving only appointing authorities or managers. However, the application of this Canon must be tempered by appropriate standards of flexibility so that the judiciary insures that it can find the most qualified person for the position. Additionally, local governing bodies are encouraged not to appoint court personnel who are relatives of members of the local governing body.
(C) A judiciary employee shall not be appointed by or assigned to a person who is a member of the employee's immediate family, nor shall there be any assignments as supervisor and subordinate between employees engaged in a dating relationship.
Comment: A judiciary employee should not serve under a member of that employee’s immediate family nor where a dating relationship exists between supervisor and subordinate. This restriction may result in a qualified candidate being summarily rejected for a position; it may also present a hardship to smaller counties. However, when balanced by the need for actions free of the taint of nepotism both in appearance and in fact, this restriction is necessary. Regardless of the fact that situations may arise in which the persons involved may be personally free from conflict, some employment decisions will remain susceptible to prejudices that occur simply because of the relationship.
(D) Persons shall not be appointed as court employees when their relatives are employees of a law-enforcement agency within the same unit of government and when that appointment creates an appearance that the law-enforcement agency may have an improper influence over court matters. Nothing contained herein shall diminish the restrictions imposed by the various court 21 directives following the decision in Hughes v. Lipscher, 720 F. Supp. 454 (D.N.J. 1989), vacated 906 F.2d 961 (3rd Cir. 1990), which shall remain in full force and effect.
Comment: Employees are referred to Directive #1-92, "Supreme Court Policy Governing Municipal Court Administrators and Deputy Administrators Who Are Married to or Are the Parents or Children of Police Officers," and any subsequent Directives on this or related topics.
(E) Selection, appointment, promotion, or other personnel actions shall not be influenced by the criminal record of a relative of the person being considered.
Comment: Unless a conflict in fact is created by a judiciary employee’s having substantive review or custodial review of records relating to criminal activities of a relative, employment opportunities for a judiciary employee shall not be affected based on a relative’s criminal record. When an actual or apparent conflict arises, the employee may be transferred or assigned to different tasks.
(F) Law clerks may be employed within the same vicinage as a related judiciary employee, provided that no direct supervisory relationship exists between the law clerk and the related employee.
Comment: This permits intra-vicinage employment of law clerks with relatives employed in the vicinage. As long as no direct supervision by related persons is involved the intra-vicinage employment would not be expected to cause an apparent impropriety, particularly because the law clerk's tenure is limited to one year in duration.
Note: Canon 7 adopted December 7, 1993, to be effective immediately; Canon 7C and Comment to Canon 7C amended March 1, 1999 to be effective immediately.
}
referenced_by: none
source: njcourts.gov // verbatim; changed 2025-11-05; corpus harvested 2026-09-02