When they were first appointed to the state Judicial Review Council, the 12 men and women who heard the misconduct case against former Supreme Court Chief Justice William J. Sullivan could hardly have predicted the momentous role they would be asked to play.
In Re The Honorable William J. Sullivan was extraordinary not only for the precedent-setting nature of the accusation and finding of misconduct against a widely respected leader of the state’s judiciary. It was a case thrust into the public spotlight months before the JRC took up the allegations. The four days of hearings featured witnesses of the highest stature in the legal community. There were passionate character testimonials in Sullivan’s defense and nationally known ethics experts weighing in on opposite sides of the dispute.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
