Annotated Model Code of Judicial Conduct, 3rd Edition is an essential resource on judicial ethics. This revised and updated publication from the ABA Center for Professional Responsibility presents an authoritative and practical analysis of the judicial ethics rules and the cases, ethics opinions, and other legal authorities essential to understanding them.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

"The eighth edition of the Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct presents an authoritative and practical analysis of the lawyer ethics rules and the cases, ethics opinions, and other legal authorities essential to understanding them. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct were adopted by the ABA in 1983 and have been amended numerous times since. This new edition of the Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct represents a major refinement of previous editions. It takes into account all amendments through February 2013, as well as the American Law Institute's Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers (2000)"--Acknowledgments.

Traditional separation of powers theories assumed that governmental despotism will be prevented by dividing the branches of government which will check one another. Modern governments function with unexpected complicity among these branches. Sometimes one of the branches becomes overwhelming. Other governmental structures, however, tend to mitigate these tendencies to domination. Among other structures courts have achieved considerable autonomy vis-à-vis the traditional political branches of power. They tend to maintain considerable distance from political parties in the name of professionalism and expertise. The conditions and criteria of independence are not clear, and even less clear are the conditions of institutional integrity. Independence (including depolitization) of public institutions is of particular practical relevance in the post-Communist countries where political partisanship penetrated institutions under the single party system. Institutional integrity, particularly in the context of administration of justice, became a precondition for accession to the European Union. Given this practical challenge the present volume is centered around three key areas of institutional integrity, primarily within the administration of justice: First, in a broader theoretical-interdisciplinary context the criteria of institutional independence are discussed. The second major issue is the relation of neutralized institutions to branches of government with reference to accountability. Thirdly, comparative experience regarding judicial independence is discussed to determine techniques to enhance integrity.