Back

ABA Journal

Home

Legal Ethics

Top tax court judge should be suspended 9 months without pay, review panel says

May 14, 2013, 10:00 am CDT

Comments

Does an attorney have a professional obligation to whine on behalf of his clients?  Perez was the chief judge.  He falsified documents.  The deadline was three months, and he took as long as 18 months. And he still has a job!  Oh, the harshness.

By Louie on 2013 05 15, 10:36 am CDT

The recommendation that he be censured and suspended probably goes more to the finding that he falsified documents than that he routinely exceeded the three-month deadline for submitting his opinions.

The problem in many courts is that there are lazy judges that do not act in a timely manner, sometimes for many months and yet rarely see any consequence.

It is interesting to see that the Indiana trial court has the “Lazy Judge” Rule, to wit:

That the trial court has an affirmative duty to hear and decide motions and other matters pending before it, including the entry of judgment following a bench trial. When a court unreasonably delays ruling on a motion or entry of judgment, Ind. Trial R. 53.1 and 53.2 allow a party to withdraw the case from the judge, and have the matter transferred to the Indiana Supreme Court for the appointment of a special judge. The purpose of these Rules is to compel a trial court to decide matters promptly and thereby to expedite the litigation process.

By Laurence Schwartz on 2013 05 17, 10:39 am CDT

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.