Northern New England Judges Hit Bad Patch With Appearances of Impropriety.
Posted by Ed Folsom, October 26, 2024.
In a series of bad looks for the black-robed group, judges in northern New England have hit a rough patch with appearances of impropriety. Here’s a brief rundown:
Ex-Maine District Court Judge Charles Budd. This past week, the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar held hearings in a disciplinary matter pending against attorney Charles Budd. Budd was a District Court Judge from 2015 to 2023. Near the end of his tenure, he ran the drug court in Bangor. In that capacity, he attended a conference in Nashville, Tennessee, in July of 2022. Among the other attendees was Samantha Pike, a treatment counselor who had a regular role in Bangor’s drug court proceedings. Pike filed a harassment complaint against Budd in federal court later in 2022, alleging that Budd sexually harassed her at the conference. Mid-coast D.A. Natasha Irving joined Pike as a plaintiff in that complaint, also alleging that Budd sexually harassed her at the conference. The complaint was dismissed by the U.S. District Court in 2023. Irving did not appeal that decision. Pike did. Pike’s appeal remains pending before the 1st Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston.
Budd was placed on administrative leave as a judge in the fall of 2022 as a result of Pike’s and Irving’s complaints. He did not seek re-appointment when his term ended in 2023. Now, he faces discipline by the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar as an attorney, because when he was a judge he was still also an attorney.
The essence of the Bar complaint is that Budd got at least a little bit drunk and hit-on Pike and Irving, which Pike and Irving found problematic, given that Budd was a judge with authority over Pike and the potential to at some point have had authority over Irving. Now, the matter is in the news for all to see. The hearing will continue on a date not yet announced (Story here).
Justice Catherine Connors of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. Yesterday, the Portland Press Herald featured a story about the Maine Committee on Judicial Conduct’s recent recommendation that Justice Catherine Connors of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court should be censured for violating Cannon 2, Rule 2.11(A) of the Maine Code of Judicial Conduct, which provides in pertinent part, “[A] judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceedings in which the judge’s impartiality may be questioned.” As counsel for to the Committee stated in his Report to the Supreme Judicial Court Recommending Disciplinary Action:
Sensitivity to the appearance of conflict and/or the appearance of impropriety is of great importance required of all judges. This is particularly so when it concerns a Justice on the Maine Supreme Judicial Court as the laws established by the Court tend to affect not only the immediate parties to an appeal but other Mainers who must abide by decisions that will stand for decades and effect numerous citizens over time. Justice Connors’ failure to be sensitive to the appearance of impropriety and recuse herself in the face of it, not only violates the Judicial Code of Conduct but it undermines public confidence in the judiciary.
Before Connors was appointed to the Supreme Judicial Court in 2020, she was an attorney in Portland who represented banks and handled a lot of big commercial cases, including foreclosure cases. In 2017, she was on the losing side of a foreclosure case before the Court as appellate counsel for Bank of America, and she submitted an amicus brief (“friend of the court” brief) on the losing side of another foreclosure case. These cases set a then-new precedent in Maine law under which mortgage borrowers got to keep the house for free when the lender made certain types of errors in bringing a foreclosure action.
During Connors’ judicial confirmation hearings in 2020, she was specifically asked how she would handle the matter of recusal in certain banking cases before the Court, specifically including foreclosure cases. Connors assured the Judiciary Committee that she would err on the side of caution to avoid any appearance of impropriety.
Earlier this year, Connors participated in decisions overruling the Law Court’s 2017 foreclosure precedent, now allowing mortgage-holders to pursue foreclosure actions despite initial defects that the Court held to be final and fatal in 2017. In one of those 2024 cases, Connors was part of the 4-3 majority that overruled the earlier decision. In that case, her vote was the deciding vote. After Connors participated in oral argument on that case but before the court decided it, she consulted the Maine Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee for their opinion as to whether she should recuse herself in that and another foreclosure case. The Advisory Committee informed her that they did not see a conflict of interest requiring recusal, so she continued to sit on both cases.
As the Committee on Judicial Conduct points out, however, the issue is not whether there was a conflict of interest in fact, but whether Connors’ “impartiality may be questioned;” a matter solely of whether an appearance of impropriety objectively exists.
You might note that the Committee on Judicial Conduct’s referral for censure is directed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court for a decision. This is the same court on which Justice Connors sits as Justice. That might seem strange, but because it is the highest court in the state there’s really no place else to go. Awkward! But also perhaps a little cozy?
Hancock County probate judge William Blaisdell. In September, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court suspended Hancock County probate judge William Blaisdell from his judicial role for 1 year, with all but 4 months of the suspension suspended. According to a September 17, 2024 story in the Portland Press Herald:
“Blaisdell, 54, was found in contempt of court in Waldo County in March because he was behind on more than $33,000 in child support payments to his ex-wife. He had to pay her $50,000, including attorney fees and interest, to avoid a 90-day jail sentence, according to court records. He also has not filed at least three years of tax returns from 2020 to 2022, records state.”
The Supreme Judicial Court found Blaisdell’s contempt of the Waldo County District Court Judge’s orders “egregious,” and remarked that the public can hardly be expected to respect and have confidence in Maine courts when they see a Maine judge flouting court orders. Imagine that.
New Hampshire Supreme Court Justice Anna Marconi. In Maine’s neighboring state of New Hampshire, the Attorney General’s Office recently secured an indictment against Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi for two felony counts: attempting to commit improper influence, and criminal solicitation. Justice Marconi’s husband, Geno Marconi, is the director of the New Hampshire Port Authority. A grand jury is investigating him and he has taken a leave of absence from his post. The investigation of Geno Marconi caused Justice Marconi to recuse herself from certain cases pending before the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
Justice Marconi is alleged to have spoken to New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu to tell him that the investigation of her husband is “the result of personal, petty and/or political biases.” According to an October 16, 2024 story in the New Hampshire Bulletin, the indictment alleges that Justice Marconi told Sununu “’that there was no merit to allegations against or subsequent investigation into Geno Marconi’ and ‘that the investigation into Geno Marconi needed to wrap up quickly because she was recused from important cases pending or imminently pending before the New Hampshire Supreme Court.’” Justice Marconi is currently on leave from the New Hampshire Supreme Court. The New Hampshire Business Review reports that the Legislature is unlikely to seek her impeachment. Justice Marconi denies that she did anything wrong.
That’s quite a collection of recent bad looks for Northern New England jurists.
