Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The New York Court of Appeals on review of the proposed removal of Supreme Court and New York City Civil Court justices (who are brothers) agreed with its Commission on Judicial Conduct that removal of one was appropriate but disagreed as to the other.
The removed justice had accepted a loan from his campaign manager and failed to keep his promise to repay: "His evasiveness creates a strong inference that he was dishonest in his dealings with [the campaign manager] and her attorney with respect to [a] requested affidavit, and in his testimony in [the judicial misconduct] proceedings."
The court was unconvinced that the other justice had deliberately omitted required information from his financial disclosure statements. The court was "unable to conclude by a preponderance of the evidence that any of the omissions was intentional." The court imposed an admonition.