Opinion  Opinion 2026-2

Date:	08/19/2026
Organization:	Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Ethical Opinions for Clerks of the Courts

Assistant Clerk-Magistrate seeking to launch a solely online, small consumer products business

Dear Assistant Clerk-Magistrate ____________,

This is in response to your email to the Committee dated July 13, 2026, requesting an opinion from the Committee on whether it is appropriate for you to launch a solely online, small consumer products business selling personal hygiene products under an independent brand name, of which you would be the sole owner. In your email, you state that you are an Assistant Clerk-Magistrate at the ___________ District Court. 

You maintain that the business would operate under its own brand name, unaffiliated with your name, title, or position, and that you intend to remain anonymous to consumers.  It is your understanding that the only place that your name would potentially appear in a public record is a corporate filing with the Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth. 

Pursuant to your current business plan products would be sold exclusively online, direct-to-consumer (DTC), with no retail storefront and no marketing directed toward any particular geographical area or municipality.  No business activity would occur during court hours or on courthouse premises.  The business would have no financial relationship with any municipality or governmental entity within your court's jurisdiction, and you are not aware of any suppliers who are attorneys or others likely to appear before your court. Your planned supplier is located out of state. Additionally, you would not use your title or office in connection with the business. 

Please note that this Advisory Committee is authorized to render opinions with respect to the Code of Professional Responsibility for Clerks of the Courts, and this opinion is limited to the Committee’s consideration of your request as it relates to that Code.  In considering your request, the Committee focused on Canon 3, Canon 4 and Canon 5.  The Committee focused on the substantive parts of these Canons outlined below.

Canon 3, titled Performance of Duties, requires that a "Clerk-Magistrate shall devote the entire time during normal court hours to the duties of his or her office ..."

Canon 4 addresses impartiality and disqualification and states, in relevant part, (B) Personal Affairs: "A Clerk-Magistrate shall not engage in outside activities which would cast doubt on his or her capacity to decide impartially any issue that may come before the Clerk-Magistrate in any official capacity"; and

Canon 4(C), Business Activities: "A Clerk-Magistrate shall not enter into any business relationship which reasonably might create a conflict with the proper performance of his or her official duty or detract from the dignity of the office."

Canon 4 (E), Disqualification: “A Clerk Magistrate should disqualify himself or herself from serving in an adjudicative capacity in a proceeding in which the Clerk Magistrate's impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Canon 5(C) (1), Financial Activities:  "A Clerk-Magistrate shall not conduct outside business during normal court hours and shall refrain from financial and business dealings that tend to reflect adversely on the Clerk-Magistrate’s impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of the position or involve transactions with lawyers or other persons likely to come before the court in which the Clerk-Magistrate is serving."

In the opinion of the Committee, your participation in this business venture is permissible under the Code provided you follow all of the parameters that you have outlined above including that you would not use your title or office in connection with the business, you would not conduct any business during work hours or in the courthouse, the business would have no financial relationship with any municipality or governmental entity within your court's jurisdiction, and you are not aware of any suppliers who are attorneys or others likely to appear before you.  You also must refrain from soliciting court staff.  We advise that you review Opinion 2017-2, Opinion 2009-1, and Opinion 94-11 which dealt with outside employment. 

We caution you that the Code’s prohibition against financial business activities during work hours or at the courthouse includes electronic communications and transactions including reviewing and/or sending any business-related emails or interaction with any other business-related electronic platform during work hours.  The Committee advises you to consult and comply with the provisions of Canon 3 and Canon 5 (C) (1) relating to business and financial activities. 

You state that your business would not involve transactions with lawyers or others likely to come before you.  Nevertheless, if you become aware that a customer may appear before the court in which you work, the Committee advises you to consult and comply with the provisions of Canon 4 (E) Disqualification.

Although you have disclosed that your business would be selling “personal hygiene” products, without a further description of specific products that you would be selling, the Committee cannot opine on whether any of the products would “detract from the dignity of the office.”  The Committee advises you to consult and comply with the provision of Canon 4 (C). 

Therefore, it is the opinion of the Committee that launching this business would not be prohibited by the Code provided that you adhere to all the cautions and parameters outlined above.

Sincerely,
Christine P. Burak, Esq.
Secretary, Advisory Committee on Ethical Opinions for Clerks of the Courts