Throwback Thursday

5 years ago this month:

  • The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly reprimanded a judge for appearing in a photograph on his law firm’s web-site in a judicial robe and advertising himself on the web-site as an active part-time judge pro tem in the Arizona court system.  Watters, Order (Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct February 6, 2015).
  • The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly reprimanded a judge for presiding over a criminal damage trial even though he was a leasing agent for the company that managed the property that had been damaged and had spoken with the resident of the property about the damage.  Wilson, Order (Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct February 6, 2015).
  • Based on the judge’s consent, the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications publicly admonished a judge for (1) assuming the role of prosecutor by contacting an attorney to offer a deferral agreement to the attorney’s client, who had received a speeding ticket; (2) permitting deferral payments to be sent directly to the court, rather than to the prosecutor’s office; and (3) adopting a practice in which she or her court clerk would directly negotiate deferral agreements with defendants, rather than allowing the prosecutor to offer these agreements.  Public Admonition of Hagerty (Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications February 9, 2015). 
  • Accepting a statement of circumstances and conditional agreement for discipline, the Indiana Supreme Court permanently banned a former judge from serving in any judicial capacity for (1) abusing her judicial powers in several cases; (2) failing to follow proper legal procedures in guilty plea and sentencing hearings; (3) injudicious behavior outside of the courtroom relating to her conflict with the father of her children; and (4) during the Commission’s investigation, providing incomplete answers to requests for information, failing to respond to Commission communications in a timely manner or at all, failing to respond to the Commission’s subpoena duces tecum, and failing to appear for depositions.  In the Matter of Bennington, 24 N.E.3d 958 (Indiana 2015).
  • Granting an application of the Commission on Judicial Qualifications, the Iowa Supreme Court reprimanded a part-time magistrate for signing a warrant to search the home of a client.  In the Matter of Krull, 860 N.W.2d 38 (Iowa 2015).
  • Based on the findings of the Commission on Judicial Qualifications and adopting its conclusions of law, the Kansas Supreme Court suspended a judge for 90 days without pay for (1) making offensive and demeaning comments of a sexual nature to female attorneys and staff members; (2) sending an ex parte e-mail to an attorney’s client that expressed bias or prejudice toward the attorney; and (3) trying to broker an employment opportunity for his wife.  In the Matter of Henderson, 343 P.3d 518 (Kansas 2015).
  • Adopting the findings and recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, based on stipulated facts , which the judge accepted, the New Jersey Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a part-time judge for (1) using his judicial stationery to attempt to intercede in a juvenile matter on behalf of a councilman’s daughter and (2) representing a Garwood Borough councilman in a personal matter while serving as judge on the Garwood municipal court.  In the Matter of Inacio, Order (New Jersey Supreme Court February 27, 2015).
  • Based on stipulations of facts and stipulated violations, the Ohio Supreme Court suspended a judge for 2 years for exhibiting a demeaning attitude toward counsel and litigants in 2 matters before him; the Court stayed the suspension on the condition that he commit no further misconduct and comply with a contract with the Ohio Lawyer Assistance Program.  Disciplinary Counsel v. Weithman, 34 N.E.3d 865 (Ohio 2015) .
  • Based on the judge’s agreement, the Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct publicly censured a judge for his conduct in several hearings in a juvenile case, which the Court of Appeals had determined was a “procedural train wreck.”  Re Newell (Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct February 25, 2015).
  • Based on a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly reprimanded a judge for telling a defendant that his fedora would be removed if he did not provide support for his statement that wearing it was part of his Jewish faith.  In re Ladenburg, Stipulation, agreement, and reprimand (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct February 20, 2015).
  • With the judge’s consent, the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board issued a letter of counsel to a judge for leaving the scene of an accident.  Letter to Rega (Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board February 10, 2015).

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s