PBA Rates Phila. Judge as 'Highly Recommended' for Superior Court in Last Batch of Evaluations
The newly rated contenders come in addition to the five that the bar association rated in January, all of whom are vying for two open spots on the intermediate appellate court.
March 11, 2019 at 03:05 PM
3 minute read
In its final round of ratings for potential Superior Court candidates, the Pennsylvania Bar Association has issued ratings of three additional contenders, with one receiving a “highly recommended” rating and two receiving ratings of “not recommended.”
The three hopefuls include a Philadelphia judge who before her election to the Common Pleas Court served as chief counsel to Sen. Anthony Williams, D-Philadelphia, and a Pittsburgh attorney who caused concern at the bar association's Judicial Evaluation Commission over her handling of social media content that was allegedly plagiarized.
The newly rated contenders come in addition to the five that the bar association rated in January, all of whom are vying for two open spots on the intermediate appellate court.
The only candidate to receive a “highly recommended” rating in the latest round was Philadelphia Judge Timika R. Lane.
Lane has presided over criminal cases after she was elected to the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas in 2013. Before taking the bench, she worked in private practice handling family law cases, and later handled major trials at the Defender Association of Philadelphia. In 2009, she became chief counsel to Williams.
In its release explaining the ratings, the commission said Lane's colleagues describe her as “fair, even handed, highly ethical, hardworking and knowledgeable.”
“She demonstrates a commitment to public service and has extensive community involvement,” the commission said. “Due to her background, attributes and experience, the commission is confident the candidate would serve with distinction as a Superior Court judge.”
The rating makes Lane and fellow Philadelphia Judge Daniel McCaffery as the only two candidates to receive “highly recommended” ratings.
Pittsburgh attorney Elizabeth Tarasi, who focuses on personal injury and real estate, was rated as “not recommended” over concerns stemming from alleged plagiarism.
According to the commission, Tarasi had the “requisite legal knowledge, ability and writing skills” needed to become a Superior Court judge, and her record of community involvement also showed she had “the appropriate temperament and character for the judiciary.” However, the commission said it had concerns about her social media content.
“During her interview with the commission, it was revealed that she failed to exercise oversight of plagiarized content on her social media website,” the commission said. “When questioned, she failed to accept full accountability for the matter, leaving the commission with concerns about her character and integrity.”
As a result the commission rated her as “not recommended.”
Tarasi did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
McKeesport attorney Ryan James also received a “not recommended” rating by the commission.
According to the commission, James has been practicing since 2012, and, after working as an associate for three months, he opened his own firm as a solo practitioner with a general practice. The commission noted James has never held a judicial clerkship.
“Although known for his good temperament and diligent work ethic, the commission finds the candidate has not had the breadth or depth of experience necessary to take on the role of the Pennsylvania Superior Court,” the commission said.
Along with McCaffery, the three newly rated contenders join candidates Catherine “Kate” Harper, Megan Lee King and Cumberland County Judge Christylee Peck, who each received a “recommended” rating, as well as Amanda Green-Hawkins, who received a “not recommended” rating.
James did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
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 AllMiddle District of Pennsylvania's U.S. Attorney Announces Resignation
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1A&O Shearman, Hogan Lovells and the Stories That Shaped Africa This Year
- 2Borden Ladner Gervais Cyber Expert Warns of AI-Boosted Ransomware Attacks
- 3Phila. Judge Upholds $68.5M Verdict Over Construction Worker's Death
- 4Biden Vetoes Bill to Create More Federal Judgeships
- 5Memories of a Straight Shooter
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