Commission recommends Anne Arundel Orphans’ Court Judge Vickie Gipson’s removal

Listen to this article

The Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities recommended on Wednesday the removal of Anne Arundel County Orphans’ Court Chief Judge Vickie Gipson, finding that her “misconduct was calculated, continuous, and egregious.”

The commission, which disciplines state judges, unanimously recommended her removal for numerous violations of the rules governing judges’ conduct amid a long personal conflict with fellow judge Marc Knapp.

“The Commission concludes that Chief Judge Gipson’s conduct requires the imposition of the most serious sanction,” wrote Anne Albright, who chairs the commission and serves as a judge on the Maryland Appellate Court.

“Due to the gravity of (her) sanctionable conduct, the Orphans’ Court would be well served without Chief Judge Gipson. She lacks the requisite conduct, interpersonal skills, leadership and accountability to remain a member of Maryland’s judiciary.”

Gipson declined to comment.

The commission has now recommended the removal of both Gipson and Knapp. It recommended the latter’s removal in March; he is scheduled to appear before the Maryland Supreme Court next month.

Although the commission described Knapp as the “primary aggressor,” it did not excuse Gipson’s behavior.

“(S)he chose to operate as a victim instead of acknowledging and taking responsibility for her conduct,” Albright wrote.

Elected in 2018, Gipson began clashing with Knapp shortly into his tenure, which began in December 2022. The two argued in the judges’ chambers and on the bench; the disciplinary commission said their shouting could be heard throughout the building that houses both the orphans’ court and the Anne Arundel County Office of the Register of Wills.

Saying she feared for her safety, Gipson obtained a temporary peace order against Knapp, had security personnel stationed in the chamber and twice called police to the court when Knapp didn’t do what she asked. Calling 911, Albright wrote, was “unacceptable.”

She prevented Knapp — who testified that he did not respect her as a writer or lawyer — from filing dissents, and she allowed the court’s third judge, David Duba, to miss significant time and to work outside the court’s statutorily mandated hours, the commission found.

Gipson repeatedly sought the immediate and permanent removal of Knapp, including reaching out directly to Albright and Maryland Supreme Court Chief Justice Matthew Fader, despite knowing that Knapp was also subject to disciplinary proceedings.

Then she refused to cooperate with the investigation. Instead, Albright wrote, Gipson “put forth a defiant posture towards the Commission as well as a disregard for the rules enacted to govern the judicial discipline process, from investigation through disposition.”

In one brief, she cited three cases that either didn’t exist or didn’t stand for the proposition for which she cited them.

The removal recommendation is harsher than the discipline sought by the commission’s investigative counsel, who serve as a sort of prosecutor. They asked in December that she be suspended without pay and that she receive mentoring, education and training. Investigative counsel did recommend that Knapp be removed.

Gipson was not represented by an attorney for most of the disciplinary process.

She is not seeking reelection. Knapp is on the ballot, as are three fellow Democrats and three Republicans.

The Commission on Judicial Disabilities only makes recommendations; the Maryland Supreme Court takes final action.

Orphans’ courts are Maryland’s probate courts, directing the management of deceased peoples’ estates.

Three counties — Harford, Howard and Montgomery — do not have separate orphans’ courts. Rather, circuit court judges handle probate responsibilities. Three jurisdictions — Baltimore City, Baltimore County and Prince George’s County — require orphans’ court judges to be licensed attorneys.

Gipson had faced previous discipline, the recommendation noted.

She failed to show up for work for much of 2020 and 2021, during the coronavirus pandemic, and failed to file timely tax returns and pay outstanding obligations. She also used court resources to apply for a political position, attempted to sell jewelry and insurance to court personnel, and advocated for political issues on social media. In September 2022, she successfully completed a diversion agreement.