MLK said: "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"

End Corruption in the Courts!

Court employee, judge or citizen - Report Corruption in any Court Today !! As of June 15, 2016, we've received over 142,500 tips...KEEP THEM COMING !! Email:

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

NY Judges Get Commission Warning

Recusals Could Lead to Discipline, Conduct Commission Forewarns
Also Backs Efforts To Win Raise for Judges
The New York Law Journal by Daniel Wise - May 13, 2008

The Commission on Judicial Conduct yesterday warned the state's 1,300 judges that using recusals to protest legislative inaction on a pay raise could result in disciplinary action. The commission's statement cited 10 different sections of the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct that could be implicated when judges refuse to handle cases where parties are represented by lawmakers or their law firms. The warning was issued despite what the commission called "the judiciary's understandable disappointment at the continuing compensation impasse."

The agency also endorsed a pay raise for the judges as "well deserved and long overdue." The statement was adopted by the commission at its monthly meeting last week. The warning reinforced a similar caution issued earlier this month by Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye (NYLJ, May 2). Although opinions by the court system's Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics allow judges to recuse themselves as a matter of "individual conscience," Chief Judge Kaye in an e-mail to all state judges cautioned that use of recusals as a "strategy" could "hurt our cause." In warning the judges of the potential ethical repercussion of recusals, the judicial conduct commission noted that it was acting in the wake of "recent published reports that at least some judges are encouraging or engaging in acts of recusal" out of a purported "frustration over the compensation issue." Within the last two weeks, news reports have said at least seven judges either have recused themselves or openly mused about it. They sit in counties as diverse as Nassau, Orange, Cattaraugus and Erie.

In addition, Steven Schlesinger, the managing partner of Long Island-based Jaspan Schlesinger Hoffman, which has two legislators as members, said yesterday that about 25 judges had refused to handle the firm's cases and that the number has grown in the last two weeks. In its statement, the conduct commission noted that it would not benefit the judges' "justifiable interest" in a pay raise for "the Commission to be constrained to consider complaints against judges" alleging violations of the 10 cited conduct code provisions or others. Robert H. Tembeckjian, the commission's counsel and administrator, declined to comment on whether the agency has received any complaints or is itself examining the recusals. The commission, however, called on "all parties with a role to play" to do so "responsibly, professionally and with the utmost sensitivity to promoting public confidence in the independence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."

Independence Stressed

In backing a pay raise, the commission also stressed the need to preserve the independence of the judiciary. It warned that without "fair compensation," the ability to maintain a bench of talented and honorable men and women," a critical element of the democratic system of checks and balances, may come under "acute" strain. The claim that the toll taken by inflation on judicial salaries, which have not been raised since January 1999, has compromised judicial independence, is central to three pay raise lawsuits, including one brought by Chief Judge Kaye on behalf of the court system. The lawsuits also contend that judicial independence has been compromised by the tying of judicial raises to extraneous issues such as raises for lawmakers, who also have not had a raise since 1999.

The commission expressly noted in its statement calling for enactment of "an appropriate judicial compensation measure" that it was doing so "without comment on the merits" of the pending lawsuits. Chief Judge Kaye's lawsuit seeks an order raising the salary of Supreme Court justices from $136,700 to the $169,300 now being earned by federal District Court judges, with the salaries of judges from other state courts to be adjusted proportionately.

Code Provisions Cited

Among the conduct code provision that could be implicated in a recusal, the commission noted, were those requiring judges not to "use the prestige of judicial office to advance a private interest, Rules §100.1, and barring any "pledges or promises" inconsistent with the impartial performance of their duties, Rules §100.3(B)(9)(a,b).

Two recent opinions by the ethics advisory committee concerning questions related to recusals when dealing with legislators' firms expressly mentioned that judges must recuse themselves when they are convinced they can not be fair (Opinion 08-76 [April 24, 2008] and Opinion 07-190 [Dec. 6, 2007]). In Opinion 08-76, however, the advisory committee concluded that Chief Judge Kaye's filing a lawsuit in her official capacity on behalf of the court system did not require judges to recuse themselves from cases involving lawmakers. To the contrary, the committee concluded judges must hear those cases if they believe they can be fair. In an earlier opinion, the advisory committee concluded that judges should not recuse themselves solely because of the "long standing issue of judicial salary increases pending before the Legislature" (Opinion 07-25, Feb. 22, 2007).

Act of Conscience Asserted

Cattaraugus County Judge Larry M. Himelein (See Profile), who was widely quoted as saying he has recused himself from cases involving Weitz & Luxemburg, a firm with which Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, is affiliated, said in an interview yesterday he had acted "absolutely" as a matter of individual conscience. Since "I recused myself from a case where I owned 100 shares of stock in one of the parties," he said, "how could there not be a conflict if I were to sit upon a case involving a firm of one of the lawyers who sets my salary?" Judge Himelein serves as Cattaraugus County's judge for County, Family and Surrogate's courts. With respect to his widely published quote calling Mr. Silver "a slug," Judge Himelein said the statement was not made directly to a reporter but in an e-mail to other judges that had been leaked to the press. Sullivan County Court Judge Frank J. LaBuda (See Profile) had been reported to be considering recusing himself because of the chief judge's lawsuit prior to the advisory committee's issuing its opinion that recusal was not mandated.

Since that opinion was issued on April 24, Judge LaBuda has decided to handle cases involving the law firms of legislators, according to his law clerk, John Diuguid. Mr. Diuguid, however, said Judge LaBuda, who sits in County and Surrogate's courts, could not be reached yesterday. Mr. Diuguid also said he was unaware of the reason Judge LaBuda had against recusal. David Bookstaver, a spokesman for Chief Administrative Judge Ann Pfau (See Profile), said it would be inappropriate for her to comment on the conduct commission's statement. — Daniel Wise can be reached at


Anonymous said...

The Commission on Judicial Conduct is as big a joke as the DDC is. Fraud, corruption, hyprocrisy and arrogance are the best words to describe both of these "ethics" groups, and who are unethical themselves. I brought clear evidence that a nyc supreme court judge committed a 2 million fraud and all I got was a dumb form letter saying no thanks. The Commission only goes after judges who other corrupt people decide should become targets for whatever reason.

Anonymous said...

I can tell you first hand that the Commission on Judicial Conduct is corrupt. I was once a clerk for a NYS Supreme Court Judge, an honest man who would not play the back door games, and who then became a target of the OCA hoodlums who wanted to give him a lesson. Somehow he survived, though he's sadly more cautious because he knows they can again create false charges against him anytime they want. This people, is our NY judicial system: frozen in fear by a bunch of OCA hoods.

Anonymous said...

I know the STATE COMMISION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT..well and I agree with both statements, completely!
I wonder if the commission knows many, many judges only work part time. I don't mean a short cut of hours here and there, but everyday just 2,3,4 hrs daily, with days and weeks off beyond your imagination!
The taxpayer believes judges were elected to work the same hours as they do..7-8, 5 days a week with a scheduled vacation. JUDGES are civil servants and should work like they are our equals. If judges need more money for their 2-4 hrs of work a few days of the week, then can the media or commission on judicial this and then we can vote on the raise proposal and certainly, if they deserve it...we will authorize it immediately!
Also, if you want action from the commission let them kiss you on the works real well!

Anonymous said...

the Commission on Judicial Conduct is controlled by the system, it is not independent and that's a big part of the problem with meaningful oversight. For the Commission to make these statement pubicly indicates that the polling data is not in their favor. They clearly see that the taxpayers are not going stand for this and they also see these alleged Judges for what they are THUGS. And the best part is that these THUGS/Judges hung themselves. No one said they were smart and everyone can see that now.

Anonymous said...

The COMMISSION on Judicial Conduct should get the warning! Everyone in the legal system knows that the CJC group is a collection of hit men (and women) for the machine. Bring in the FEDS!

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the CJC is trying to direct the spotlight away from themselves.

If the CJC actually monitored and disciplined judges like we pay them to do, the public would support pay raises.

As it is now, the public wants to see most of them hanged.

Anonymous said...

to the person who clerked for a supreme and knows about the backroom deals and phone call fixing, would love to hear and get any inside info possible - i saw it here in upstate for 12 years and have had fabricated "system" ethics charges brought even though the clients all supported me and the clients never filed complaints and may be filing myself as the 9th related suit and also very politically active and believe there is wholesale changes needed in the system - so any info you can share would be great - brad hamilton of the ny post previously did a story on a judge up here who has so far had all of his judicial conduct complaints whitewashed without even a phone call from an investigator although the judge had very strong pataki contacts - not "EVERY" single person ( multiple ) who complained could have been so wrong that the complaints could "all" be dismissed without investigation - the word is that some evidence of systematic "whitewashing" at the cjc is coming out soon so any info that can be shared please send to and if you want to read the brad hamilton story from the ny post it was called "judge dread" and was published in dec 2004

Anonymous said...

they are all unfit to act as Judges.....what's going on under those black dresses guys/gals? They're all hacks.

Anonymous said...

The JCC is too busy playing footsy with each other to investigate the many claims they get.....really! Fun on the job is primary.

Anonymous said...

I often wonder how the jud. cond. comm. could take a claim against one judge..who they could not hang the first time and he was cocky about it..and then got him through someone, who then paid a tremendous price with OCA'S continual stalking and retaliation. When this person was finally destroyed by OCA, the JCC REFUSED TO hear one detail about the administrative judge involved in the destruction? Aren't they supposed to, at the "VERY LEAST take a "written" complaint about serious charges regarding any judge... being accused by a taxpayer?
Having lots of first hand knowledge about the JCC from before, you would think they would co-operate..just a never know what a person knows and has observed..right J?

Anonymous said...

What about the people that are left hanging by the recusals. What a sin!
The problem in the Courts is that no one cares about anyone of the litigants. Why are we so worried about the Judge's moral? How about the litigants and their children that the Judges have destroyed. Perhaps the failure to give a pay raise, is the WRATH OF THE ULTIMATE JUDGE.

Blog Archive

See Video of Senator John L. Sampson's 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption

The first hearing, held in Albany on June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:

               Video of 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption
               The June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 1
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 2
Add to Technorati Favorites