Newark City Judge Faces Ethics Charges Over Litigant's Lengthy Jail Stay
The state Supreme Court's Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct filed the complaint against Newark Municipal Court Judge Marvin Adames.
December 03, 2018 at 02:32 PM
4 minute read
A Newark municipal court judge is facing disciplinary charges for having a woman jailed for 23 days for supposedly being disrespectful to him in the courtroom in a landlord-tenant matter.
The New Jersey Supreme Court's Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct filed the complaint against Newark Municipal Court Judge Marvin Adames.
ACJC Counsel Maureen Bauman said in the complaint—dated Nov. 27 and made public several days later—that Adames should be disciplined because he ordered the woman, Linda Lacey, to be jailed over an issue that didn't justify incarceration.
According to the complaint, Lacey spent a total of 23 days in the Essex County jail over the Christmas 2016 holiday season because Adames believed she was “disrespecting” the court and needed a mental health evaluation—which was never conducted.
Lacey first encountered Adames on Nov. 17, 2016, in the landlord-tenant dispute that led to a petty disorderly persons complaint, the ACJC said. The apartment owner apparently wanted to evict Lacey and show the apartment, but Lacey refused to cooperate, according to the complaint.
Lacey, it seems, was at least somewhat uncooperative in court.
“I'm starting to believe, based on my experience, that you have some mental condition,” Adames told Lacey, adding that he planned to hold her in contempt pending a psychiatric evaluation by county authorities, according to the complaint.
“You must have some mental condition, ma'am,” the judge said, according to the complaint.
He then put Lacey in a holding cell before releasing her and scheduling another hearing date for Dec. 16, 2016, the complaint said.
At the Dec. 16 hearing, Lacey's attorney asked to be relieved as counsel, and Adames granted the request, the complaint said.
Lacey again appeared to be uncooperative. “You're being disrespectful,” Adames said, according to the ACJC. “You're a very intelligent woman. You're a very well-dressed woman. You're well put together. But you're doing nothing but playing games.”
Adames then ordered Lacey detained in the county jail pending the psychiatric evaluation and set a contempt hearing for Dec. 23, 2016. He set bail, which Lacey could not meet, the complaint said.
At the Dec. 23 hearing, Adames learned that there had been no psychiatric evaluation and he rescheduled the hearing for Jan. 5, 2017. Lacey remained behind bars in the interim.
At a Jan. 3, 2017, hearing Adames acknowledged that Lacey had been held in jail longer than was necessary, and said he would order her release after dismissing the contempt charge and disorderly persons complaint.
Adames, according to the complaint, said the “system hasn't worked the way it's supposed to work.”
Still, Lacey wasn't released until a few days later—Jan. 7.
The complaint said Adames told ethics investigators he ordered Lacey held in jail because he feared that she would skip further court appearances.
The ACJC alleges that Adames violated the Codes of Judicial Conduct and the Rules of Professional Conduct by having Lacey jailed for a period longer necessary for the charges she faced, and for failing to follow proper procedures when he ordered the psychiatric evaluation that never occurred.
Adames, the complaint said, abused his authority by having Lacey remain in jail for 23 days.
Attempts to reach Adames were unsuccessful, and it was not immediately clear whether he has retained an attorney.
Adames, admitted in New Jersey in 2000, remained on the Newark Municipal Court as of the complaint date, the document said.
The complaint does not recommend a specific quantum of discipline being sought.
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
© 2025 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 AllBankruptcy Judge Clears Path for Recovery in High-Profile Crypto Failure
3 minute readGibbons Reps Asylum Seekers in $6M Suit Over 2018 ‘Inhumane’ Immigration Policy
3 minute readNJ Supreme Court Clarifies Affidavit of Merit Requirement for Doctor With Dual Specialties
4 minute readJudge Denies Retrial Bid by Ex-U.S. Sen. Menendez Over Evidentiary Error
Trending Stories
- 1LexisNexis Announces Public Availability of Personalized AI Assistant Protégé
- 2Some Thoughts on What It Takes to Connect With Millennial Jurors
- 3Artificial Wisdom or Automated Folly? Practical Considerations for Arbitration Practitioners to Address the AI Conundrum
- 4The New Global M&A Kings All Have Something in Common
- 5Big Law Aims to Make DEI Less Divisive in Trump's Second Term
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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