So now, not only is Karen Abrams under suspicion, but the whole Maryland Bar Association is in on it?????renfred said:
Okay.
Shall we talk about 9-11 now? And did you come here from Amazon.com?
St. Mary's County Judicial Ethics Question?
- Thread starter renfred
- Start date
Okay.
Shall we talk about 9-11 now? And did you come here from Amazon.com?
Abrams - Ethics
This is the same type of elitist, arrogant, aloof, overconfidence that will continue to erode the public's trust in the St. Mary's County Courthouse, with Karen Abrams at its helm.
This comment contains the same simplicity and arrogance that Abrams uses when she carries out her legal thought process, and comes up with her legal interpretations. Just ask anybody at the courthouse.
vraiblonde said:
This is the same type of elitist, arrogant, aloof, overconfidence that will continue to erode the public's trust in the St. Mary's County Courthouse, with Karen Abrams at its helm.
This comment contains the same simplicity and arrogance that Abrams uses when she carries out her legal thought process, and comes up with her legal interpretations. Just ask anybody at the courthouse.
So this IS personal, and not some matter of principle?renfred said:
What'd you get in trouble for?
What a morooon
So anyone else that would like to view the actual text under Maryland Rules here is a link - http://michie.lexisnexis.com/maryla...6/102d?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0#
Also note that if this was a problem and complaints had been filed the judge would be prohibited from sitting on cases while the conflict was unresolved.
Show me in any of the Canons or the asosiated comments where it is improper for a judge to rent, lease, or sublet an office that they can not practice law from to another lawyer?renfred said:
So anyone else that would like to view the actual text under Maryland Rules here is a link - http://michie.lexisnexis.com/maryla...6/102d?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0#
Also note that if this was a problem and complaints had been filed the judge would be prohibited from sitting on cases while the conflict was unresolved.
Daniel J. Guenther - law office address
I went out to the Maryland State Court system website and tried to look up cases in which Daniel J. Guenther represented clients in Judge Karen H. Abrams Courtroom. Unfortunately, the computer system does not specify which judge is on which case, which ought to be added in the next round of changes to the system. However, what was really interesting to me was that Daniel J Guenther does not list 41620 Fenwick Street as his address. He only uses his P.O. Box number.
Example of what his info is on the system:
Name: Guenther, Esq, Daniel J
Practice Name:
Address: PO Box 623
City: LeonardtownState:MDZip Code:20650
Interestingly enough, when Abrams was using that same office, she listed the address as 41620 Fenwick Street, in addition to her P.O. Box.
Example:
Name: Abrams, Esq, Karen Hope
Practice Name:
Address: PO Box 605
41620 Fenwick Street
City: LeonardtownState:MDZip Code:20650
All of this can be checked into at this web address:
http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry
I went out to the Maryland State Court system website and tried to look up cases in which Daniel J. Guenther represented clients in Judge Karen H. Abrams Courtroom. Unfortunately, the computer system does not specify which judge is on which case, which ought to be added in the next round of changes to the system. However, what was really interesting to me was that Daniel J Guenther does not list 41620 Fenwick Street as his address. He only uses his P.O. Box number.
Example of what his info is on the system:
Name: Guenther, Esq, Daniel J
Practice Name:
Address: PO Box 623
City: LeonardtownState:MDZip Code:20650
Interestingly enough, when Abrams was using that same office, she listed the address as 41620 Fenwick Street, in addition to her P.O. Box.
Example:
Name: Abrams, Esq, Karen Hope
Practice Name:
Address: PO Box 605
41620 Fenwick Street
City: LeonardtownState:MDZip Code:20650
All of this can be checked into at this web address:
http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry
Karen H. Abrams - policy regarding COI
To answer your first question...Nowhere. I have never said a word about whether or not it is appropriate for "a judge to rent, lease, or sublet an office that they can not practice law from to another lawyer?"
Don't know if you read any of the prior posts or not, but the issue I have is with her not disclosing this fact on the record, when her renter is going before her. She should only have two ethical choices:
1. Fully disclose the financial conflict of interest on the record
2. Assign the case to another Judge or offer to recuse herself
What has been practiced up to this point is to not disclose the conflict of interest to anyone on the record and hope that no litigants find out before, during, or after the trial. Then if they do find out, hope that nobody will appeal based upon this. If they do appeal, most appellate attorneys would have trouble arguing an ethical issue about Abrams to her husband's colleagues in Annapolis at MDCOSA. Even attempting to do this would most likely not bring good results to the client or the attorney's career.
So in reality, you're only real shot at the proper administration of justice, in a case where Guenther is the opposing attorney, and you're judge is Karen H. Abrams, is for Abrams to disclose the relationship on the record at some point before trial starts. Then a litigant could file a motion for recusal (if the judge has not already offered to recuse), or the litigant could ask for a change of venue, etc.
If what I have stated is not "telling it like it is", then someone with more legal knowledge please step up and say so. Up to this point, I've only heard political spinning, and a few light attempts to attack the issue from a legal standpoint.
Ken King said:
To answer your first question...Nowhere. I have never said a word about whether or not it is appropriate for "a judge to rent, lease, or sublet an office that they can not practice law from to another lawyer?"
Don't know if you read any of the prior posts or not, but the issue I have is with her not disclosing this fact on the record, when her renter is going before her. She should only have two ethical choices:
1. Fully disclose the financial conflict of interest on the record
2. Assign the case to another Judge or offer to recuse herself
What has been practiced up to this point is to not disclose the conflict of interest to anyone on the record and hope that no litigants find out before, during, or after the trial. Then if they do find out, hope that nobody will appeal based upon this. If they do appeal, most appellate attorneys would have trouble arguing an ethical issue about Abrams to her husband's colleagues in Annapolis at MDCOSA. Even attempting to do this would most likely not bring good results to the client or the attorney's career.
So in reality, you're only real shot at the proper administration of justice, in a case where Guenther is the opposing attorney, and you're judge is Karen H. Abrams, is for Abrams to disclose the relationship on the record at some point before trial starts. Then a litigant could file a motion for recusal (if the judge has not already offered to recuse), or the litigant could ask for a change of venue, etc.
If what I have stated is not "telling it like it is", then someone with more legal knowledge please step up and say so. Up to this point, I've only heard political spinning, and a few light attempts to attack the issue from a legal standpoint.
Abrams - Judicial Ethics
You "bet that it is in there"? It would be interesting to actually find out.
I said that actually renting the property to Guenther is not inappropriate at all. Judges are allowed to have business interests in a wide variety of areas just like anyone else. What's different about a judge is that they are in a position of public trust, a position that has a very large effect on a very large number of people. Therefore they are held to much higher ethical standards. They are held to the "appearance of impropriety" standard. Therefore they are expected to fully disclose any relevant information that "could" be construed by a reasonable person as a potential conflict of interest. The whole balancing act for a sitting judge is "how do I live a normal life in the community while also upholding a very high standard of ethics and try to maintain the public's trust in the judicial system?" Granted, it is a tough job, and a tough balancing act, but the truth of the matter is that you shouldn't seek out a seat as a judge if you are not willing to face an increase in public scrutiny. It comes with the turf so to speak. I think it is a little brazen to handle the 41620 Fenwick Street property the way that she has.
I posted this same piece of info on the Judge Abrams Poll thread as well.
I pulled some relevant quotes from the Financial Disclosure Statement Form that judges are to file with the MD Court of Appeals.
From The Maryland Committee on Judicial Ethics website:
http://www.courts.state.md.us/ethic...ndiclosure.html
“The Court of Appeals has adopted this form in response to the suggestion contained in Code, State Government Article, §15-610 that the Court promulgate and administer rules to require members of the Judiciary and certain judicial appointees to disclose particularly relevant information concerning their financial affairs.”
“For purposes of Schedule A, “interest” includes any leasehold interest and interest in oil, gas or other mineral royalty or lease. For example, if you rent your dwelling, it should be listed.”
“BLOCK 9 - IDENTITY OF OTHERS WITH INTEREST”
It would seem that BLOCK 9 of the Schedule A would be where a financial disclosure of Daniel Guenther's lease on her 41620 Financial Disclosure Statement would be listed.
Ken King said:
You "bet that it is in there"? It would be interesting to actually find out.
I said that actually renting the property to Guenther is not inappropriate at all. Judges are allowed to have business interests in a wide variety of areas just like anyone else. What's different about a judge is that they are in a position of public trust, a position that has a very large effect on a very large number of people. Therefore they are held to much higher ethical standards. They are held to the "appearance of impropriety" standard. Therefore they are expected to fully disclose any relevant information that "could" be construed by a reasonable person as a potential conflict of interest. The whole balancing act for a sitting judge is "how do I live a normal life in the community while also upholding a very high standard of ethics and try to maintain the public's trust in the judicial system?" Granted, it is a tough job, and a tough balancing act, but the truth of the matter is that you shouldn't seek out a seat as a judge if you are not willing to face an increase in public scrutiny. It comes with the turf so to speak. I think it is a little brazen to handle the 41620 Fenwick Street property the way that she has.
I posted this same piece of info on the Judge Abrams Poll thread as well.
I pulled some relevant quotes from the Financial Disclosure Statement Form that judges are to file with the MD Court of Appeals.
From The Maryland Committee on Judicial Ethics website:
http://www.courts.state.md.us/ethic...ndiclosure.html
“The Court of Appeals has adopted this form in response to the suggestion contained in Code, State Government Article, §15-610 that the Court promulgate and administer rules to require members of the Judiciary and certain judicial appointees to disclose particularly relevant information concerning their financial affairs.”
“For purposes of Schedule A, “interest” includes any leasehold interest and interest in oil, gas or other mineral royalty or lease. For example, if you rent your dwelling, it should be listed.”
“BLOCK 9 - IDENTITY OF OTHERS WITH INTEREST”
It would seem that BLOCK 9 of the Schedule A would be where a financial disclosure of Daniel Guenther's lease on her 41620 Financial Disclosure Statement would be listed.
MMDad
Lem Putt
You're a stubborn one, aren't you? Now you know that the appropriate place for the Judge to disclose is to the COA. Yet you still insist that she should disclose irrelevant, previously disclosed information to anyone who walks into her court room.renfred said:
Suppose she saw a case regarding a local gas station. Should she disclose at trial that she once bought gas there? That's absolutely no different than your desire to have her announce her landlord tenant relationship every time somebody walks into her court room. It's just plain rediculous.
You still haven't answered this:
vraiblonde said:
MMDad said:
Your logic here is so flawed that its not worth addressing. Unfortunately, Abrams' logic with regard to serious legal issues and interpretations in her courtroom are handled with much of the same arbitrary, flippant logic. If there are any local attorneys reading this, they know exactly what I'm talking about. Interpreting State law as it relates to a particluar case is not one of her stronger points. And for the record, she doesn't need to disclose her landlord/tenant relationship every time somebody walks into her courtroom,...only when her tenant, Daniel J. Guenther is an attorney representing one of the clients. We don't know if she disclosed her financial relationship relating to 41620 Fenwick Street to the COA...yet.
FromTexas
This Space for Rent
renfred said:
You know everyone here sees you for the kook you are? Even those who agree she should be disclosing recognize you are a kook with a beef against her? If you case was one of simple disclosure you wouldn't feel the need to slander her decisions continously.
In fact, I think we will create a poll.