Matter of Vincent

2 Citing cases

  1. Matter of Murphy

    82 N.Y.2d 491 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 38 times
    In Matter of Murphy, 82 N.Y.2d 491, 495 (1993), the judge was "careles[s] in handling public moneys" deposited into Court.

    As this Court has noted, "carelessness in handling public moneys is a serious violation of [a Judge's] official responsibilities" (Matter of Petrie v State Commn. on Judicial Conduct, 54 N.Y.2d 807, 808). Such breaches of public trust have frequently led to removal (see, Matter of Vincent, 70 N.Y.2d 208, 209; Matter of Rater, 69 N.Y.2d 208, 209; Matter of Petrie, supra; Matter of Cooley, 53 N.Y.2d 64, 66). Had petitioner taken immediate remedial steps, a lesser sanction might be warranted for a first transgression.

  2. Matter of Lenney

    522 N.E.2d 38 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 4 times

    Moreover, petitioner's explanation for his asserted failure to respond to the Commission's letters requesting information — that he actually did respond but used the wrong zip code — remains unsatisfactory in light of the Commission's repeated advice to him that it had received no response, with no additional (or duplicate) submission forthcoming from petitioner. While we agree with petitioner that removal of a Judge from the office to which he has been elected is an extreme sanction not to be imposed lightly, here we conclude that removal was supported by the record and not excessive (see, Matter of Vincent, 70 N.Y.2d 208; Matter of Rater, 69 N.Y.2d 208; Matter of Sims, 61 N.Y.2d 349, 357; Matter of Cooley, 53 N.Y.2d 64). We reach this conclusion, however, without addressing the Commission's determination regarding petitioner's handling of the 41 cases, or indeed without agreeing even that the Commission acted within its jurisdiction in its review of the day-to-day progress of those cases.