Throwback Thursday

10 years ago this month

  • The Arkansas Judicial Discipline & Disability Commission admonished a judge for personally soliciting campaign contributions from 2 attorneys. Letter to Simes (Arkansas Judicial Discipline & Disability Commission May 23, 2006).
  • The California Commission on Judicial Performance admonished a judge for sanctioning an attorney without prior notice or an opportunity to be heard. Public Admonishment of Maciel (California Commission on Judicial Performance May 9, 2006).
  • Approving the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the Judicial Qualifications Commission pursuant to the judge’s stipulation, the Florida Supreme Court reprimanded a judge for having a romantic relationship with an attorney who was practicing before him. Inquiry Concerning Adams, 932 So. 2d 1025 (Florida 2006).
  • The Florida Supreme Court removed a judge for (1) misrepresentations during his campaign and (2) violating campaign finance laws. Inquiry Concerning Renke, 933 So. 2d 482 (Florida 2006).
  • Granting a petition for discipline upon stipulation, the New Mexico Supreme Court ordered that a judge be reprimanded and fined $1,500 for (1) identifying himself as a judge to police detectives who were issuing citations to his son and his son’s friends and involving himself in the adjudication of the matters and (2) raising his voice toward a defense attorney, preventing her from fully objecting for the record, and admonishing her in front of her client. Inquiry Concerning Ramirez, 135 P.3d 230 (New Mexico 2006).
  • Accepting the determination of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, the New York Court of Appeals agreed that censure was the appropriate sanction for a judge who had failed to properly exercise the summary contempt power. In the Matter of Hart, 849 N.E.2d 946 (New York 2006).
  • On its own motion pursuant to a stipulation, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct discontinued proceedings against a non-lawyer judge and closed the matter following the judge’s resignation and affirmation not to seek or accept judicial office at any time in the future. The Commission had filed a formal complaint against the judge alleging that he had failed to deposit court funds in a timely manner; failed to report and remit $685 in court funds to the state comptroller in 15 cases in the manner required by law; collected restitution and failed to distribute $1,842 to the appropriate recipients; failed to keep a cashbook as required by law; and failed to make dockets of small claims and civil matters as required.  In the Matter of Harris, Stipulation (New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct May 1, 2006).
  • On its own motion pursuant to a stipulation, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct discontinued proceedings against a non-lawyer judge and closed the matter following the judge’s resignation and affirmation not to seek or accept judicial office in the future. The Commission had filed a formal complaint alleging that the judge had (1) granted default judgments to plaintiffs in approximately 44 cases without the documentation required by law; (2) entered judgments on the basis of information elicited in ex parte communications with defendants in 14 cases; (3) failed to afford pro se defendants in 15 cases full and fair opportunity to be heard by entering judgments against them after an appearance without scheduling trials or requiring the plaintiffs to appear or file motions for summary judgment; (4) in 2 contested matters, failed to afford the defendants the opportunity to present evidence or cross-examine plaintiffs’ witnesses before entering judgment in favor of the plaintiffs; (5) in 2 matters, failed to disqualify himself or otherwise disclose to the parties his relationship to a witness who was related to him within the 6th degree; (6) failed to transfer a criminal matter to the proper court and granted a default judgment to the claimant in a small claims matter in which the attorney for the corporate respondent appeared, notwithstanding that the law provides that a corporate defendant may appear by counsel; and (7) for over 3 months, banned an attorney from appearing before him.  In the Matter of Hewlett, Stipulation (New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct May 1, 2006).
  • Based on an agreement for discipline by consent, the South Carolina Supreme Court removed a judge for sexual activity with 2 female court staff. In the Matter of Cash, 630 S.E.2d 283 (South Carolina 2006).
  • Accepting an agreement for discipline by consent, the South Carolina Supreme Court reprimanded a judge for presiding over his uncle’s bond hearing and giving preferential treatment to his uncle and a second defendant. In the Matter of Davis, 630 S.E.2d 281 (South Carolina 2006).
  • The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct admonished a judge for imposing sentences that he knew or should have known were unenforceable and violated state law. Public Admonition of Peters (Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct May 4, 2006).
  • The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct warned a judge for allowing his close relationship with the daughter of his court coordinator to influence his conduct and judgment in 2 cases in which she represented a party. Public Warning of Plunk (Texas State Commission on Judicial May 30, 2006).
  • The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct admonished a former municipal judge for failing to obtain the required judicial education for fiscal year 2003. Public Admonition of Supkis (Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct May 25, 2006).

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s