Arthur M. Kahn, Esq. Town Attorney, Rochester
I am writing in response to your request for an opinion as to whether the first deputy town clerk may also serve as clerk to the justice court.
In the absence of a constitutional or statutory prohibition against dual-officeholding, one person may hold two offices simultaneously unless they are incompatible. The leading case on compatibility of office isPeople ex rel. Ryan v Green,
There are two subsidiary aspects of compatibility. One is that, although the common law rule of the Ryan case is limited to public offices, the principle equally covers an office and a position of employment or two positions of employment. The other is that, although the positions are compatible, a situation may arise where one has a conflict of interest created by the simultaneous holding of the two positions. In such a situation the conflict is avoided by declining to participate in the disposition of the matter. If such situations are inevitable as opposed to being possibilities, there is an inherent inconsistency in the positions.
Section
The Uniform Justice Court Act (UJCA) authorizes the creation of the office of clerk to the justice court (UJCA, §
You have also asked whether a conflict of interest exists if this same person is married to a State trooper. In the past, we have found that in situations where a public official has authority to determine policy matters affecting his or her spouse, a conflict of interest exists (Op Atty Gen No. 85-22). In the immediate case, neither the town clerk nor the justice court clerk exercise such authority. State police commonly prosecute traffic infractions in the local courts. The justice court clerk, however, exercises no judicial or other discretionary powers regarding such proceedings.
We conclude that the offices of first deputy town clerk and clerk of the justice court are compatible. There is no conflict of interest when the person holding both these positions is married to a State trooper.
