“In State v. Weleck, 10 N.J. 355 (1952), the court said: the duties are prescribed by some special or private law, the duties are imposed by a general statute or arise out of the very nature of the office, the source of the duty need not be alleged….for the courts to take judicial notice of such duties…. [at 366] Duties arising “out of the very nature of the office,” i.e., inherent duties, usually are derived from the common law.”
“The appointive duties as well as the duty of judicially determining controversies which are performed by petitioner are primary functions of the government of the State of Indiana, and the State pays petitioner, upon his election, a fixed salary each year for carrying out these duties. The amount of petitioner’s salary is fixed by law and is not dependent on or directly related to his expenditures. Although petitioner is not subject to control or supervision in the performance of his official duties, it is certainly understood that he will dispose of the cases arising in his circuit expeditiously and in a manner in keeping with judicial standard. Petitioner must perform his duties in a place appointed by law, using the physical facilities provided by the State, and in the administration of his court (as distinguished from actually deciding cases) he is assisted by persons paid by the State, e.g., a probation officer and bailiff. For the foregoing reasons we are of the opinion that for purposes of section 22(n)(1) petitioner is an employee of the State of Indiana and is not, therefore, entitled to deduct the claimed expenses from his gross income in determining adjusted gross income.” Fisher v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue 24 T.C. 269 (U.S.T.C. 1955)
In State v. Cohen, 32 N.J. 1 (1960), the court held: … the duties and their source are considered as one, and there is no requirement that the allegedly violated duties of the office be expounded in detail unless the source of the duties must be cited in the indictment. Just at the source of the prescribed duty existing in the common law or general statute may be judicially noticed, so also may the duty arising from such sources be similarly noticed. And it is from the common law that we derive the primary duties attached to the position…. [at 6-7]
In State v. Winne, supra, the Court said: “It is only when duties arise under a special or private law that they must be pleaded.” 12 N.J. at 179. No special or private law prescribed Stevens’ duties. They are inherent duties of his office which may be judicially noticed. Every… officer has an inherent duty to obey the law and to enforce it. That duty is essential to the preservation of a free society. Its absence makes the law enforcer lawless, permitting violence, oppression and injustice. Thus, in State v. Cohen, supra, the court said: A…..officer has the recognized duty to use all reasonable means to enforce the laws applicable to his jurisdiction, and to apprehend violators…. Numerous cases have described the inherent duties….. and other public officials in very broad terms.
Driscoll v. Burlington Bristol Bridge Co. Inc., 8 N.J. 433 (1952), held that public officers have a duty “to serve the public with the highest fidelity … to be diligent and conscientious, to exercise their discretion not arbitrarily but reasonably, … to *66 display good faith, honesty and integrity, … to be impervious to corrupting influences….” Id. at 474-476.
In State v. Weleck, supra, defendant was charged with violation of a duty “to render legal services to said Borough to the best of his ability and uninfluenced by motives adverse to the best interests of said Borough.” 10 N.J. at 367. The Court found that this language described an inherent duty of Weleck’s office as a municipal attorney.
In State v. Begyn, 34 N.J. 35 (1961) the court said: The indictment quite properly in substance alleged the duty of any official to be to perform the tasks assigned to him uninfluenced by adverse motives engendered by requesting or accepting any gift, gratuity or promise under an agreement either evilly not to do some of the very functions of his position at all or to do them in a manner contrary to the public interest. Such a duty is an inherent and fundamental one, specifically related to the particular office and founded on something more than a mere moral concept. [at 51] The Begyn court stated: That duty requires service to the public of the highest fidelity, a refusal to be influenced by corrupting motives, as well as honesty, integrity and good faith. The provisions of these constitutions are laws which must be obeyed and enforced…. When they are not, that failure is the breach of a duty imposed upon all public official.
“We have no officers in this government from the President down to the most subordinate agent, who does not hold office under the law, with prescribed duties and limited authority. And while some of these, as the President, the Legislature and the Judiciary, exercise powers in some sense left to the more general definitions necessarily incident to fundamental law found in the Constitution, the larger portion of them are the creation of statutory law, with duties and powers prescribed and limited by that law.”
Government of the Virgin Islands v. Gordon 244 F.2d 818 (3d Cir. 1957)
“Judges, like Presidents, depend upon open and candid discourse with their colleagues and staff to promote the effective discharge of their duties.” In re Certain Complaints Under Investigation by an Investigating Comm., 783 F.2d 1488, 1519 (11th Cir.1986) ( “Hastings “), quoted in In re Grand jury, 821 F.2d 946, 957 (3rd Cir.1987). “[T]here exists a [qualified] privilege . . . protecting confidential communications among judges and their staffs in the performance of their judicial duties.” Hastings, 783 F.2d at 1520, cited in Smith v. U.S. Dist. Court for S. Dist. of III, 956 F.2d 647, 650 (7th Cir.1992). “The judicial privilege is grounded in the need for confidentiality in the effective discharge of the federal judge’s duties. In the main, the privilege can extend only to communications among judges and others relating to official judicial business such as, for example, the framing and researching of opinions, orders, and rulings.” Hastings, 783 F.2d at 1520.
See LOCAL GOVERNMENT ETHICS LAW New Jersey Statute N.J.S.A. 40A:9-22.1 et seq
“Section 700 County of the County Law, in defining the powers and duties of the office of each county District Attorney Statewide, states in subdivision 1, “It shall be the duty of every district attorney to conduct all prosecutions for crimes and offenses cognizable by the courts of the county for which he shall have been elected or appointed”. The word “cognizable” may be defined as “within the jurisdiction of the court” (7A Words and Phrases, p 113). Having concluded that this court does have jurisdiction, it is the right, duty, and obligation of the District Attorney to conduct the prosecution of the instant matter, since it is cognizable by the courts of New York County.” People v. Weiner 85 Misc. 2d 161 (N.Y. Crim. Ct. 1976)
Leave a Comments