Municipal Court Judge Charged With Continuing to Sit Despite IOLTA Ineligibility
The Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct has filed a formal complaint against a municipal court judge who continued to sit on the bench and to practice law while ineligible for failing to maintain interest-bearing trust accounts and professional liability insurance.
June 20, 2019 at 11:49 AM
4 minute read
The Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct has filed a formal complaint against Municipal Court Judge Guy Killen who continued to sit on the bench and to practice law while ineligible for failing to maintain interest-bearing trust accounts (IOLTA) and professional liability insurance, as required of all practicing attorneys and law firms in the state.
Killen has been a member of the bar and a practicing attorney since 1981. He operated his law office as Guy W. Killen, P.C. in Woodbury.
He served as a part-time judge in Vineland Municipal Court, a position he held until he was suspended from his judicial duties by order of Superior Court Judge Benjamin Telsey, effective May 14, 2018. The suspension remained in effect until June 5, 2018.
Killen could not be immediately reached at his law office for comment.
The complaint, filed June 14 and signed by ACJC disciplinary counsel Maureen G. Bauman, charged Killen with several violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
On the first count, any attorney admitted to practice law in New Jersey must maintain IOLTA, into which all sums received on behalf of clients are deposited. Killen is charged with failing to maintain such accounts, which resulted in his inclusion on a list of attorneys who, by Supreme Court order, are deemed ineligible to practice law until they submit the required trust account forms to the IOLTA fund trustee.
According to the complaint, the state Supreme Court, pursuant to Rule 1:28A-2(d), entered an order, effective Oct. 20, 2017, declaring Killen to be administratively ineligible to practice law based on his noncompliance with the mandatory IOLTA program.
Killen appeared in court on behalf of clients and continued to sit as a municipal court judge in Vineland during the period of IOLTA ineligibility, according to the complaint.
In March 2018, the Office of Attorney Ethics filed its own complaint against Killen, charging him with failing to comply with the requirements of the IOLTA program, which resulted in Killen being administratively ineligible to practice law.
In his answer to the OAE complaint and at a Dec. 5, 2018, hearing, Killen admitted that he failed to comply with IOLTA program requirements, according to the ACJC document.
The June 14 ACJC complaint states, “by [Killen's] conduct in practicing law and sitting as a municipal court judge in Vineland from Oct. 17, 2017 to March 29, 2018, when respondent was administratively ineligible to practice law based on his failure to comply with IOLTA requirements as per Rule 1:28A, et seq., respondent violated Canon 1, Rule 1.1 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which requires judges to observe high standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved.”
Killen also violated Rule 1.2 of the same code, “which requires judges to respect and comply with the law,” the ACJC said.
On or about March 29, 2018, Killen satisfied the requirement of compliance with IOLTA by submitting the proper registration forms to the IOLTA fund, said the ACJC.
On the second violation, the ACJC noted that each professional corporation operating in the state must file a certificate of insurance with the clerk of the Supreme Court within 30 days after filing its certificate of corporation. Killen never did this, violating both Rule 1:21-1A(b) and Rule 1:21-1A(a)(3), the complaint said.
Killen was cited for his failure to maintain professional liability insurance for the firm that he operated as a professional corporation. Thus, he also violated Canon 2, Rule 2.1 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, “which requires judges to promote public confidence in the independence, integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary,” the ACJC said.
Killen admitted to the additional infractions in his response to the March 29, 2018, OAE complaint, the ACJC noted.
The complaint also charges that Killen's conduct violated New Jersey Court Rules 1:14 and 1:18.
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 AllSocial Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World
3 minute readBank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action
3 minute read'Something Really Bad Happened': J&J's Talc Bankruptcy Vote Under Attack
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Year That Was
- 2Employment Law Changes Expected From Second Trump Administration
- 3Decision of the Day: Sri Lanka Granted Stay of Litigation Over Defaulted Sovereign Bond Debt
- 4AI Adoption, Data Center Building Boom Opening More Doors for Cybercriminals, Many of Them Teenagers
- 5Mayor's Advisory Committee To Hold Hearing on Fitness of Judicial Candidates
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