Offering common sense solutions for judicial discipline.
How to file a complaint of judicial misconduct
Not all judges are like this, but you know what they say about "Absolute power ..."
Do you know -
A biased judge?
A judge who abuses his power?
A judge involved in questionable behavior?
What can you do? File a complaint of judicial misconduct! Our booklet shows you how in 10 Easy Steps!
(And you don't even have to be a litigant in a trial! In fact, it's better if you're not.)
The Problem
(This text from the Introduction of "You be the Judge!")
Are you frustrated because you know something unseemly about a judge and a case he's sitting on? Perhaps he's sitting on a case involving his son-in-law, or plays squash every week with one of the attorneys in court, or he or his wife is a big shareholder in a company at trial? You keep saying to yourself, "That's not right!"
It's wrong when a judge is a big shareholder in a company at trial. A judge could make a lot of money in the stock market steering a case a certain way. But what about the reverse situation? What about a judge who lost money on a stock, who has an ax to grind in a trial?
U.S. District Judge David Hittner, like many Americans, lost money on Enron. Yet he sat on the case of Mrs. Lea Fastow, wife of Enron's former finance chief. Federal Prosecutors had worked out a plea bargain for Mrs. Fastow, which isn't unusual. What's unusual, according to several law professors, is that Judge Hittner rejected the plea. Although he disclosed his financial involvement with Enron to Defense attorneys, as required by law, he didn't remove himself from the trial, as also required by law. [1] Regardless what you think about Enron and Mrs. Fastow, the fact that Judge Hittner lost money in Enron raises concerns about his impartiality when he rejects certain plea bargains. (He also refused to recommend the normal minimum-security prison for the non-violent Mrs. Fastow.)
Is there no judge in the 5th Circuit who didn't own stock in Enron, who could keep the reputation of the judiciary above reproach? According to Congressional testimony, judges that have a financial interest in a company at trial - and don't report it - is a big problem. [2]
The Solution? YOU!
(continued from book)
In our country, no one is supposed to be above the law. You can do something. Instead of saying to yourself "That's not right" you can formally say it to others. Like, to other judges. According to law, they can discipline a judge in a variety of ways, even to the point of strongly "requesting" a federal judge take early retirement. And, like videotaping police officers beating a black man, you don't have to be the victim to file a complaint. That is, you don't have to be a litigant in a case. Anyone can file a complaint of judicial misconduct.
The booklet You be the Judge! How to file a complaint of judicial misconduct outlines the process of filing a complaint of Judicial Misconduct (or Disability) against a judge: from motives, to background, the mindset and the mechanics, touching on the law you'll need to know, all in 10 Short Steps.
MORE ABOUT THE BOOKLET > >Footnotes
[1] This despite a plain reading of the law. See page 10, (Part One, Chpt III, D.) of The Federal Judicial Center's Recusal: Analysis of Case Law Under 28 U.S.C. Sections 455 & 144. "Even the smallest financial interest (e.g. ownership of a single share of stock) requires recusal."
[2] See testimony of Douglas T. Kendall, section II B,
Studies Reveal Remarkable Numbers of Stock Conflicts
It is also troubling to note that in more than 80 percent of the conflict cases we identified, the judges in question ruled at least partially in favor of their financial interests. ... But I do find it very troubling when judges hold a great deal of stock in major corporate litigants, rule in favor of these litigants in most cases and, occasionally, rule in cases where they have a stock conflict. It certainly adds grist to the mill of those who argue that the judicial system is biased in favor of wealthy corporate interests.
Anyone who believes that the problem of stock conflicts has been solved in the aftermath of the Kansas City Star and Community Rights Counsel studies should review an August 2001 story published by the Times Leader of Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania involving Senior Judge Edwin Kosik of the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Judge Kosik reportedly ruled in at least 10 cases in which PNC Bank appeared even though he owned stock in the bank. Remarkably, Judge Kosik admitted ruling in two bank cases in 1999 and 2000, after he realized the conflict and after he received a stern warning from the Codes of Conduct Committee about avoiding conflicts. Judge Kosik explained to the paper that his two rulings in favor of the bank required little decision-making and were not appealed. These explanations notwithstanding, Judge Kosik appears to have knowingly violated 28 U.S.C.§ 455 and the judiciary should take this apparent violation of federal law seriously.
[*] Even more so now. Filing a complaint now if you were a litigant is perceived by some to be "alarming."
TOP ^^