NJ Family Court Judge Reprimanded for Involvement in Friend's Custody Case
The court, in an order dated Sept. 20 and released Monday, issued the reprimand to Essex County Family Part Judge Carolyn Wright.
September 24, 2018 at 02:51 PM
3 minute read
The New Jersey Supreme Court has publicly reprimanded an Essex County judge for violating ethics rules by becoming involved in a friend's child custody case.
The court, in an order dated Sept. 20 and released Monday, issued the reprimand to Essex County Family Part Judge Carolyn Wright.
Wright initially denied violating ethics rules, but the order noted that Wright accepted the findings of the court's Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct and waived her right to a hearing before the court.
Neither Wright nor her attorney, Joseph LaSala of McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter in Morristown, returned calls seeking comment.
Wright had said in her August 2017 answer to the ACJC complaint that she was attempting to assist a family friend whose grandchild needed medical attention, and that she was attempting to resolve an issue of insurance coverage.
According to the documents, the incident occurred on Aug. 5, 2016, when Wright accompanied an acquaintance named Benjamin Hayes to the Family Part intake unit to help him obtain paperwork to file for immediate custody of his grandchild.
During the course of the day, Wright and Hayes met with a number of officials in the intake unit, who attempted to help Hayes fill out the necessary forms, the May 2017 ACJC complaint said.
At one point, Wright went to the judge who had been assigned to emergent duty that day, Judge Nora Grimbergen, and asked Grimbergen if she had time to hear a matter, but Grimbergen said she was “swamped” and did not have time to hear matters that were not properly before her, according to the complaint.
Wright told the other judge her nephew had a matter involving medical insurance, but Grimbergen instructed her to file an order to show cause, and Wright left, according to the complaint.
In her answer, Wright said she was assisting Hayes just as she would any other litigant. And, Wright said, she repeatedly apologized to judges and court personnel for any inconvenience she might have been causing.
Intake officials questioned whether the matter should be docketed in Essex County, because of Wright's relationship with Hayes, and the matter eventually was transferred to Hudson County, the complaint said.
The complaint charged Wright with failing to “conform to the high standards of conduct expected of judges” and impugning “the integrity of the judiciary,” in violation of Canon 1, Rule 1.1, and Canon 2, Rule 2.1, of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Wright, the ACJC charged, also “created the risk that her judicial office would be an influential factor in the processing of [Hayes'] application” to gain custody of his grandson. The complaint said that was a violation of Canon 2, Rule 2.3(a).
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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOn the Move and After Hours: Brach Eichler; Cooper Levenson; Marshall Dennehey; Archer; Sills Cummis
7 minute readConstruction Worker Hit by Falling Concrete Settles Claims for $2.3M
4 minute readEagle Pharma Founder Sues Company to Recoup Cost of SEC Investigation
2 minute read$113K Sanction Award to Law Firm at Stake: NJ Supreme Court Will Consider 'Unsettled Law' Frivolous Litigation Question
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1$83M Verdict After $100K Demand Rejected in Henry County
- 2Samsung Flooded With Galaxy Product Patent Lawsuits in Texas Federal Court
- 3How Marsh McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
- 4On the Move and After Hours: Brach Eichler; Cooper Levenson; Marshall Dennehey; Archer; Sills Cummis
- 5Review of Ex-parte orders by the Appellate Division
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250