Showing posts with label judicial conduct board. Show all posts
Showing posts with label judicial conduct board. Show all posts

Saturday, January 20, 2024

Vermont Supreme Court Bars Former Probate Judge From Service

By Liam Elder-Connors

The Vermont Supreme Court has signed off on an order that bars a former probate judge from ever again serving as a judicial officer.

William Cobb had a private law firm in St. Johnsbury and worked part-time for three years as Caledonia County's probate judge — an elected position. William Cobb was suspended from his judicial post in 2022 after he lost his law license for 15 months.

The Professional Responsibility Board, which oversees attorneys, found that Cobb violated five rules of conduct, including disclosing confidential juvenile records and failing to provide competent representation to a client.

The Judicial Conduct Board, which oversees judges, opened their investigation to look into allegations that Cobb misled investigators.

The Judicial Conduct Board also reprimanded Cobb in 2020 for using his judicial position to gain advantages for clients facing criminal charges.

The agreement to bar Cobb from the bench, signed off on by the state's high court on Jan. 4, resolves the conduct board's case.

Cobb did not respond to a request for comment.

Source:
Vermont Supreme Court Bars Former Probate Judge From Service

Sunday, January 27, 2019

Orange County Judge Faulted for Handling of Guardianship Case


By Jordan Cuddemi
Valley News Staff Writer


Newbury, Vt. — An investigator for the Judicial Conduct Board has found that an Orange County probate judge failed to act “impartially and diligently” in a long-running guardianship dispute involving the adult children of a 94-year-old Newbury, Vt., woman.

Judge Bernard Lewis violated Vermont’s Code of Judicial Conduct in the guardianship case that has pitted siblings Elizabeth Guest and Bruce and Bryce Thomas against their brother Paul Thomas, according to the Jan. 7 formal complaint filed by John Kennelly, a Rutland, Vt., attorney acting as investigative counsel in the case for the Judicial Conduct Board. The three petitioners say their brother overpaid himself and mishandled assets belonging to their mother, Miriam Thomas, while serving as her legal guardian from 2010-18.

“The court (Lewis) repeatedly noted its frustration with the pace of proceedings and the guardian’s failure to comply with the orders of the court, but did nothing to require that its orders be followed and that the guardian follow the law,” Kennelly wrote in his complaint.

“The judge did not do everything a judge should and could have done to dispose of the matters before the court promptly, efficiently, and fairly. The guardian paid himself enormous amounts of money during the seven and a half years he was in control of the estate. Those payments were obviously of little benefit to the ward.”

Kennelly’s complaint asserts that Lewis violated two provisions of a judicial canon that states “a judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently.”

Lewis, who has served as a probate court judge since 2002 and is retiring, has 21 days to respond to the allegations. He is being represented by Burlington-based attorney Christopher Davis, the former chairman of the Judicial Conduct Board.

Davis declined to comment on the matter.

Lewis also practices law in Randolph and previously worked for Vermont’s Department of Banking, Insurance and Securities as a market conduct chief examiner, according to his law firm’s website.

The current chairman of the Judicial Conduct Board, Rutland-based attorney Andrew Maass, said that after Lewis responds to the complaint, a public hearing would be held to determine whether a finding of judicial misconduct is merited. If the board finds misconduct, the penalty could lead to a reprimand or other sanction, said Maass, who noted that such hearings are rare in the state.

Asked whether Lewis’ pending retirement — he did not run again in November for the part-time probate judgeship, which in Orange County pays about $51,000, and his term expires at the end of this month — would have an impact on the case, Maass said, “the jurisdiction of the board remains the same whether a judge remains in office.”

The investigation into Lewis’ actions took place after three of Paul Thomas’ siblings filed a complaint to the conduct board in January 2018, alleging Lewis engaged in a “pattern of inaction” that undermined Vermont laws, prevented a disposition in the case and wasted tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, among several other things, according to Bruce Thomas.

Miriam Thomas, who has dementia, has lived in the memory care area of Valley Terrace since 2009. The three siblings filed a guardianship petition late that year, but Paul Thomas and another sister, Mary Thomas, filed a counterpetition seeking to appoint Paul as the guardian. Lewis subsequently appointed him as financial and medical guardian in 2010.

The sibling trio objected every year to accounting reports Paul Thomas filed late, saying he had paid himself prior to filing the report without seeking court approval for the payments, a violation of state law, Kennelly wrote.

Over the years, the siblings brought forward other alleged flaws in how the guardian handled aspects of his mother’s $2.4 million estate, including an incident where Paul Thomas followed an improper process to sell property, Kennelly wrote.

Miriam Thomas and her late husband, Fredrick Bryce Thomas, owned several pieces of real estate, including a tree farm. Together they ran their 21-room Pulaski Street home as the Newbury Inn.

Lewis advised Paul Thomas of problems with his actions as guardian and expressed concerns and “displeasure” with his ability to comply with court orders, Kennelly wrote. However, Lewis didn’t issue an order to remove Paul Thomas as financial guardian until last March; the probate court judge has since recused himself from the case.

By the time Paul Thomas, 61, was removed, he had paid himself more than $250,000 from his mother’s assets for serving as guardian, according to Kennelly’s filing.

Bruce Thomas has long campaigned to strengthen Vermont’s guardianship laws, saying the state doesn’t do enough to hold guardians accountable.

“Sadly, it is hard to feel very good about any of this,” he said this week. “We commend John Kennelly’s professionalism and integrity, but this case is far from over and it is unlikely that Judge Lewis will suffer any serious sanction, especially in light of the serious harm that his judicial inaction has caused our mother and our family in general.”

Some of his proposed changes to state law would give interested parties the right to view an estate’s financial records in a timely fashion; mandate that the records be kept for a certain length of time and, if they aren’t, order the guardian be replaced; and instruct judges to approve a guardian’s annual accounting within one year of the filing date, or remove the guardian.

Making the changes would provide increased oversight and help prevent abuse of the system and the estate, he said.

“The state has good guardianship laws, but without having any ability for oversight or challenges, they are all sort of nullified,” Bruce Thomas said. “And it’s sad. Our mother can’t speak for herself.”

Attempts to reach Paul Thomas were unsuccessful. His former attorney, Norwich-based Frank Olmstead, has since retired, his law firm said this week. It wasn’t immediately clear if Paul Thomas had new representation in the matter.

The three siblings opposed to Paul Thomas’ guardianship actions have spent about $100,000 in attorneys’ fees in the case, while he has spent about $60,000, according to Kennelly’s complaint.

There is no timeline for when Lewis’ hearing before the Judicial Conduct Board will take place.

Jordan Cuddemi can be reached at jcuddemi@vnews.com or 603-727-3248.

Full Article & Source:
Orange County Judge Faulted for Handling of Guardianship Case

Saturday, December 12, 2015

State judicial board won't drop investigation of judge


HARRISBURG, Pa. - The body that investigates misconduct allegations against Pennsylvania judges soon will decide whether charges are warranted against state Supreme Court Justice Michael Eakin.

The Judicial Conduct Board on Tuesday denied a request by Eakin’s lawyer to stop its investigation and send the case directly to the Court of Judicial Discipline.

Board member James Schwartzman said the request isn’t allowed under state rules.

Schwartzman said the board is required to investigate so it can determine if charges are warranted and then make the case to the court.

Eakin is being investigated for his role in an explicit email ring that also involved other judges and the state attorney general’s office.

He’s publicly apologized for what he’s described as insensitive and out of character emails.

The Judicial Conduct Board is an independent body of state residents, comprised of three judges, three lawyers and six non-lawyers. Half its members are chosen by the governor and half by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The board's job is to investigate complaints about judicial misconduct. Those investigations can result in formal charges being filed against a judge or a justice.

The board then presents its case to the Court of Judicial Discipline, which determines if a judge or justice should be suspended, removed from office or otherwise disciplined.

Full Article & Source:
State judicial board won't drop investigation of judge

Friday, March 13, 2015

State Judicial Conduct Board says Indiana County district judge charged in hit-and-run violated rule


The state Judicial Conduct Board said an Indiana County district judge accused in a September hit-and-run violated one of its rules, but has since dismissed complaints against her.

Police said Jennifer J. Rega, 41, of Blairsville drove her SUV erratically Sept. 13 on Route 286 in Cherry Hill, sideswiped an oncoming vehicle containing three people, and fled.

The board said in a statement it investigated “a number of complaints” against Judge Rega and voted to resolve those by issuing a Letter of Counsel, dated Feb. 10, rather than filing formal charges in the Court of Judicial Discipline. A letter is issued in “an isolated incident or first-time infraction” of judicial misconduct.

Judge Rega ran afoul of the board’s rule, “impropriety and appearance of impropriety to be avoided,” which states district judges must follow the law. The board said her case would be resolved if she agreed to make the letter public. She signed a consent to dismiss the complaints on Tuesday.

Judge Rega entered an Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition Program for non-violent, first-time offenders, and if she completes it by Dec. 1, she can file to have charges -- including obstruction of justice and accident involving damage to an attended vehicle -- withdrawn and her record expunged.

She has been on paid suspension since September and would resume some duties Jan. 5, the county president judge said in December.

Full Article & Source:
State Judicial Conduct Board says Indiana County district judge charged in hit-and-run violated rule