Judges don’t have to recuse if sued by litigant, MD ethics committee rules

Judges don’t necessarily have to recuse themselves from cases in which a litigant has sued them or filed a disciplinary complaint against them, the Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee ruled Monday.

In a published opinion, the committee ruled that judges should recuse themselves when they “subjectively” feel they cannot remain fair and impartial, but they are not forced to sit a case out.

The ethics committee published the opinion in response to a question by a circuit court judge who had handled custody and protective order proceedings involving a self-represented litigant. That litigant filed at least one lawsuit in federal court, moved to disqualify the “entire bench” in that judge’s jurisdiction and disclosed that they had filed a complaint with the Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities, which investigates misconduct by judges and recommends discipline.

The judge’s question implicated Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct rules requiring judges to promote public confidence in the judiciary and to “avoid conduct that would create in reasonable minds a perception of impropriety.”

The committee wrote that a “reasonable” person would not question a judge’s integrity in such a case.

“Such a person likely would understand that the litigant’s complaints are not a reasonable reaction to any action by the (judge), but a manifestation of dissatisfaction with decisions that have been adverse to the litigant,” the opinion states.

“The facts presented suggest strongly that the litigant is using the other complaints tactically, to try to remove the (judge) and other judges and magistrates from the matter. Judges have a responsibility to resist such tactics if they are able to maintain the necessary subjective impartiality.”

The facts in the ethics committee’s opinion closely mirror the case of Nathan Charles, an immigration attorney in Baltimore who represented himself in contentious divorce and custody proceedings.

Charles has sued judges of the Montgomery County Circuit Court, alleging his rights to free speech and due process were violated because he criticized the court and all of its judges. Both lawsuits were filed in U.S. District Court. Charles represented himself in the family law proceedings and the lawsuits against the judges.

Last year, Charles voluntarily dismissed his case against Montgomery County Circuit Judge Christopher Fogleman then sued Judge Louis Leibowitz. His request to add several other judges on that court and the Appellate Court of Maryland as defendants is pending, as is Leibowitz’s motion to dismiss.

Days before the ethics committee’s decision, a federal magistrate judge recommended that Charles’ lawsuit be dismissed, writing that federal courts don’t have jurisdiction to review and overturn decisions by state courts.