Orphans’ Court judge quits amid Facebook-related ethics charges

By: Steve Lash

A Charles County Orphans’ Court judge quit last week amid disciplinary allegations that he misused “the prestige of judicial office” on his Facebook page by posting a profile photo of himself in his judicial robe and engaging in partisan political discussion, giving legal advice and advertising his private business on the social media site.

William J. “Bill” Dotson, who had been on the bench since 2020, left the controversial posts online and added more despite agreeing to take them down in July, the Commission on Judicial Disabilities stated in the public charges it leveled in October.

The commission withdrew its plans to hold a hearing on the allegations in light of Dotson’s resignation from the court, which handles probate matters. The charges remain posted on the commission’s website.

Dotson, who resigned without having filed a response to the commission’s charges, said Monday that he does not believe his posts were unethical or political.

“I do not think it’s fair to hold part-time orphans’ court judges to the same standards as other (full-time) judges,” added Dotson, a nonlawyer and head of an office- management company. “It is what it is.”

Dotson, a former Carroll County Republican Party chair and state Senate candidate, posted comments on his Facebook page in the fall of 2021 endorsing then-President Donald Trump’s tariffs on foreign businesses as a way to support U.S. manufacturing, according to the commission’s charges. Dotson also “liked” like-minded comments to his posts, including one advertising an event by a partisan political group, according to the commission.

Dotson, who led protests against pandemic-related closures in Carroll County before becoming judge, also posted comments in January critical of the county council for continuing to treat COVID-19 as a pandemic rather than an endemic, the commission stated.

In these posts, Dotson gave “his personal opinions on overtly political issues as well as social and cultural issues closely aligned with national and local partisan political positions,” the commission added.

Such expressions violate the Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct’s prohibition on judges engaging “in any partisan political activities,” the commission states in its charges.

The commission also cited an October 2021 post in which it said Dotson criticized Maryland’s taxation policy toward non-resident sellers of real property and suggested that the tax not be paid, the commission stated.

“Judge Dotson participated in substantive discussion of the issue with commenters in the comments to the post during which he elaborated on his interpretation of the law, described how the law works in practice, and provided further advice on how to avoid paying the tax,” the commission stated.

This advice violated the code’s admonition that judges “shall not practice law” except when representing themselves or a family member without compensation, the commission stated.

Dotson said his views in support of U.S. manufacturing, opposing the tax and questioning pandemic policy were not intended to be partisan.

But “everything is political today,” Dotson said. “I was not going to give up my platform.”

The commission also took issue with Dotson’s Facebook posts advertising open positions at Modern Door, the White Plains-based company of which he is president.

Dotson also posted in support of the opening of a local business, a charity’s hiring efforts and a holiday-themed event by local stores that he planned to attend.

These advertisements violated the code’s prohibition on judges lending “the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interest of the judge or others, or allow them to do so,” the commission stated.

The panel added it had reached an agreement with Dotson that required him to remove his Facebook posts advocating political positions, providing legal advice or endorsing businesses and charities.

But Dotson kept the posts up and added another in August, expressing his views on “defunding the police,” the commission charged.

Dotson, a judicial appointee of Gov. Larry Hogan removed the August post after the commission sent him a letter stating that he he was not in compliance with the agreement.

The commission followed with its formal charges on Oct. 26 and gave Dotson 30 days to respond. Dotson resigned Nov. 30.

Full Article & Source:
Orphans’ Court judge quits amid Facebook-related ethics charges

State Supreme Court orders disbarment of former Sewell attorney

by Jim Walsh

TRENTON - A former South Jersey attorney has been disbarred after a disciplinary panel called her "a detriment to the profession."

The state Supreme Court ordered the action against Stephanie Julia Brown, who formerly practiced in Sewell, after reviewing a 97-page report on seven complaints against her.

The report, prepared by the court's Disciplinary Review Board, asserted Brown "either refuses to provide, or is incapable of providing, her clients with even a rudimentary level of competent representation."

It also said Brown "has demonstrated a dangerous habit of undertaking the representation of vulnerable clients and utterly failing them, in some cases to their detriment, and lying to them."

And the report claimed Brown, who did not respond to the ethics charges against her in New Jersey, had "a long history of snubbing courts (and) disciplinary authorities."

Brown could not be reached for comment on the high court's Sept. 28 order.

The disciplinary board recommended disbarment for Brown, who received a law license in New Jersey in 2006 and in Pennsylvania two years earlier.

It noted she had been suspended from the practice of law in New Jersey since April 2019, and was previously disciplined in Pennsylvania.

Most of the allegations against Brown arose from the representation of clients seeking representation in U.S. Bankruptcy Court, the report said.

An account of one complaint noted a client's multiple efforts to obtain basic information about her bankruptcy filing.

"This was beyond dropping the ball," the client, Nicole Ferrara, wrote about Brown's performance in a letter cited by the report. "She lied about having my work completed and was unresponsive from the beginning."

Among other points, it said Brown failed to tell Ferrara that her bankruptcy action would allow her to recover a car that had been repossessed. She also incorrectly advised Ferrara to turn down a job, mistakenly saying the salary would exceed a level allowed under the bankruptcy filing.

One ethics complaint arose from Brown's guilty plea in March 2019 to charges of driving while intoxicated and driving during a license suspension for a previous DWI conviction.

The complaint alleged the conviction reflected "adversely" on Brown's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer.

"We are not unmindful of what appears to be (Brown's) serious substance abuse issue involving alcohol," said the report;

But it also noted "her inability or refusal to address this issue," as well as "the adverse consequences suffered by multiple clients … and her contemptuous conduct toward the courts."

As a result of those findings, the board said, "We reach the conclusion that she must be removed from the practice of law in order to protect the public and preserve confidence in the bar."

Full Article & Source:

State Supreme Court orders disbarment of former Sewell attorney

Commission suspends Goodsprings judge for year without pay

Peace Dawn Haviland

A longtime Goodsprings judge has been suspended for a year without pay following a series of ethics charges, according to a ruling made this week by the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline.

The punishment is based on Justice of the Peace Dawn Haviland’s “repeated failure over several years to follow the law, her proclivity towards following her own moral compass in administering her version of justice irrespective of the law, and her lack of remorse and admission of wrongdoing for the same,” the ruling states.

According to a host of allegations made public earlier this year, Haviland sealed her then-son-in-law’s criminal records, ordered staff to run background checks on her friend’s boyfriend, and bullied employees.

Haviland has served as the small town’s sole justice of the peace since 1999. She was suspended with pay in December.

In her absence, three temporary justices of the peace will rotate to cover her calendars, Clark County spokesman Erik Pappa said. The arrangement has been in place since her initial suspension.

“We’re going to honor the decision, and we will continue to operate as we have these past seven months,” Pappa said.

Haviland is expected to return to the bench next year.

As justice of the peace, Haviland receives a taxpayer-funded salary of more than $70,000 a year. She does not have a law degree, which is not a requirement for justices of the peace in rural communities. Goodsprings is about 40 miles southwest of Las Vegas.

Though Haviland could not be reached for comment late Wednesday, the judge responded to her charges in March in the form of a 14-page formal statement. She contended that all claims made against her were fabricated by resentful employees.

“I do not believe that I have committed any ethical violations,” she wrote at the time. “I have at all times during my 20-year career attempted to administer justice fairly and within the confines of the law.”

She also addressed specific allegations:

— In response to an accusation that she sealed her former son-in-law’s criminal records, Haviland said an employee handed her a stack of orders to be signed. “I do not recall specifically signing this order.” The records were in a domestic case involving Haviland’s daughter, and both parties agreed to the seal, said Haviland, who recused herself from the case.

— In response to an allegation that Haviland instructed her staff to conduct a criminal background investigation on her friend’s boyfriend, the judge said she simply ran a basic public records search on behalf of a woman who lost $65,000 in a previous relationship. “This was a small favor for me and my staff to do for this woman, and my advice may have saved her tens of thousands of dollars and considerable grief and heartache,” she said.

— In response to a charge about an improper sentence she later modified, Haviland said, “It is surprising to me that I am being charged with an ethics violation based on a simple mistake.”

Haviland’s lawyer, Al Marquis, told the Las Vegas Review-Journal on Wednesday that both he and his client were “very disappointed in the decision.”

“We really thought that we had clearly established that she had not violated the code of ethics,” he said Wednesday. “But when three employees decide to gang together to bring down their boss, it’s hard to fight that.”

The commission’s ruling instead commended the employees who came forward.

“If they had not done so, these disturbing matters would not have come to light and, quite probably, would have continued far into the future,” the ruling states.  (Click to Continue)

Full Article & Source:
Commission suspends Goodsprings judge for year without pay

Ethics Court Urged To Put Pa. Judge On Hook For Retaliation

Law360, Philadelphia (August 15, 2017, 4:59 PM EDT) -- For the first time since a sweeping new set of judicial ethics rules went into effect three years ago, the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline is being urged by an ethics watchdog to find an ex-Northampton County judge liable for retaliating against staffers who complained about his purportedly abusive conduct.

The state’s Judicial Conduct Board argued in a filing on Friday that it had presented ample evidence of ex-Magisterial District Judge David Tidd’s alleged retaliatory conduct during a formal ethics trial in May, including testimony that he’d specifically requested to have two staffers transferred after coming to suspect that they’d filed a complaint against him.

“The charge of retaliation by a judge is an issue of first impression before this court,” the board said. “The board proved by clear and convincing evidence that Judge Tidd knew that retaliatory conduct was prohibited, yet he directly retaliated against his court clerks because of their cooperation with the board’s investigation.”

Tidd, who served on the bench for six years before his resignation in July 2016, was slapped with a string of ethics charges last August covering a host of alleged violations, including his refusal to issue warrants against a friend and legal colleague over his unpaid parking citations, and his failure to recuse himself in cases where he had a potential conflict. The complaint also accused him of failing to recuse himself from a case involving a citation that the landlord of his district court building received after a May 2013 traffic accident.

As Tidd faced investigation, the complaint said that he badgered and berated his court staff about any involvement they may have had in tipping off the JCB to his conduct. This, the board has argued, violates a provision of the state’s Code of Judicial Conduct that became effective in July 2014 barring retaliation “directly or indirectly against a person known or suspected to have assisted or cooperated with an investigation of a judge or a lawyer.”

A trial in the case was held over the course of several days in January, May and June, according to court records.

In proposed finding of fact and conclusions of law filed with the CJD on Friday, the board pointed to an email that Tidd sent to a deputy court administrator in Northampton County requesting the “immediate removal” of two staffers who he said he’d learned had taken part in filing a complaint against him.

Tidd later told a third staffer that he “couldn’t even look at” one of the transferred employees without feeling sick.

After learning that the third staffer had also participated in the board’s investigation, the filing on Friday said, Tidd also requested her transfer.

“This makes contact with her intolerable,” Tidd wrote in an email to the deputy court administrator cited by the board in its filing.

Tidd, meanwhile, has pushed to have the entire case thrown out on grounds that it was improperly based on allegedly selectively edited audio and video recordings he said were submitted to the board to highlight his allegedly improper behavior.

“This selective copying of the videos was very unfair since Mr. Tidd was prevented from preserving all the tapes which would have demonstrated a very fair jurist,” the ex-judge argued in his own proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law last month.

An attorney for Tidd did not immediately return a message seeking comment on Tuesday.

Tidd is represented by Samuel Stretton.

The board is represented by Chief Counsel Robert Graci and Deputy Counsel Elizabeth Flaherty.

The case is In Re: David W. Tidd etc., case number 3 JD 2016, before the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline.

Full Article & Source:
Ethics Court Urged To Put Pa. Judge On Hook For Retaliation