Even though the respondent-magistrate made it a practice to disclose to litigants that his wife worked for the sheriff’s office, he failed (1) to disclose, when appropriate, that she supervised deputies involved in a particular matter; and (2) to allow the parties and their lawyers time to consider the question of remittal outside his presence or to ensure that any agreements to waive disqualification were placed on the record.
Respondent’s misconduct constitutes grounds for discipline, and we accept the agreement for discipline by consent. Respondent is publicly reprimanded.
In re Barker (Lawyers Weekly No. 010-021-22, 4 pp.) (Per Curiam) John Nichols and Carey Taylor Markel for the Office of Disciplinary Counsel; Danny Oran Barker, pro se. S.C. S. Ct.