Attorneys representing state Supreme Court Justice Catherine Connors said she should not receive a public reprimand for failing to recuse herself in two cases, arguing it would be dangerous and corrode judicial independence.
The Committee on Judicial Conduct was asked to determine whether Connors should have recused herself from two cases before the Supreme Court because of her previous foreclosure work as a practicing attorney. The Committee found that she should have recused herself, and is recommending disciplinary action.
But in court documents, Connors' attorneys said she consulted the Judicial Branch's Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics, which unanimously found that a recusal was not necessary. Connors' attorneys added that none of the parties in either case asked for Connors to be recused, and that there is no expectation that judges avoid hearing cases involving issues they have litigated in the past.
The committee has until Oct. 10 to file a reply.
