In re Brennan, 929 N.W.2d 290

Background

Hon. Theresa M. Brennan, judge of the 53rd District Court, was charged by the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission with multiple counts of judicial misconduct based on conduct in several cases and her divorce proceedings.
Core factual allegations: she had a close personal relationship with Detective Sean Furlong while presiding over People v. Kowalski and failed to disclose that relationship or disqualify herself; she had a close friendship with attorney Shari Pollesch and failed to disclose/disqualify in cases where Pollesch or her firm appeared.
In her divorce (Root v. Brennan) Brennan delayed disqualification, attempted to delete or wipe data from her cell phone after a motion to preserve evidence was filed, and attended depositions in which she interrupted and accused witnesses of lying.
Brennan made numerous false or misleading statements under oath at her divorce deposition, on the record in cases she presided over, and under oath to the Commission; the Commission found a pattern of intentional deceit.
Additional misconduct findings: persistent discourteous/improper demeanor on the bench; directing staff to perform personal tasks and campaign work during court hours.
Procedural posture: Master conducted hearings and issued findings; Judicial Tenure Commission adopted the Master’s findings and recommended removal and assessment of costs ($35,570.36). The Michigan Supreme Court adopted the Commission’s findings and removed Brennan from office and imposed a conditional six‑year suspension if she later regained judicial office.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (JTC)	Defendant's Argument (Brennan)	Held
Failure to disclose relationship with Detective Furlong / disqualify in Kowalski	Brennan had a close, personal relationship with Furlong and failed to disclose material facts that could create bias; nondisclosure prejudiced the administration of justice	Brennan characterized relationship as mere friendship and denied need to disqualify; challenged some credibility findings	Held: nondisclosure of a close personal relationship was misconduct violating Canons and court rules; required disclosure/disqualification in relevant cases
False statements and perjury (deposition, proceedings, to Commission)	Brennan made material, intentional false statements under oath repeatedly, undermining truth-seeking and judicial integrity	Brennan disputed some findings, claimed errors or joking in some instances, and argued bias by Commission members	Held: by preponderance, Brennan made false, material misrepresentations under oath and to the Commission; this weighty dishonesty supported removal
Tampering with evidence in divorce (cell phone wiping)	Brennan intentionally deleted/failed to preserve forensically useful phone data after a preservation motion, constituting tampering	Brennan said data transfer had "glitches", did not disclose wiping, and later minimized conduct	Held: evidence showed wiping/reset that likely destroyed forensic data; conduct constituted tampering with evidence and was misconduct
Improper use of staff and campaign activity during work hours; improper demeanor	Staff testimony showed personal errands and campaign tasks were done on court time; Brennan’s courtroom demeanor was frequently discourteous and interfering	Brennan challenged scope/characterization of alleged chores and demeanor; argued some findings overstated	Held: preponderance supports findings that she required staff perform personal tasks, allowed campaign work on court time, and exhibited persistent discourtesy—these violated Canons and rules

Key Cases Cited

In re Ferrara, 458 Mich. 350 (1998) (standard and purpose of judicial discipline; sanctions to restore dignity and protect public)
In re Adams, 494 Mich. 162 (2013) (false testimony under oath by a judge warrants severe discipline, including removal)
In re Noecker, 472 Mich. 1 (2005) (dishonesty during disciplinary proceedings aggravates sanction)
In re McCree, 495 Mich. 51 (2014) (court upheld removal plus conditional suspension; discussed scope of sanctioning authority)
In re Gorcyca, 500 Mich. 588 (2017) (isolated inaccurate statements differ from an established pattern of deliberate falsehoods)
In re Brown, 461 Mich. 1291 (1999) (factors for evaluating appropriate discipline)