In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 1393
9th Cir.2011Background
- Complainant, a pro se litigant, filed four misconduct complaints and seven supplements against four district judges in civil rights cases.
- One complaint was dismissed as it challenged merits under 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(1)(A)(ii) and Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(B).
- Three complaints lacked a brief statement of facts per Judicial-Conduct Rule 6(b) and relied on attached exhibits to describe misconduct.
- Supplements were considered along with the original complaints to assess misconduct or disability, but many allegations remained unsupported.
- Allegations against lawyers, court staff, and a state judge were dismissed due to scope of the misconduct procedure, and the complainant was cautioned for abusive language with potential filing restrictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a complaint challenging merits is proper. | Complainant argues misconduct affected rulings. | Merits challenges fall outside misconduct; should be dismissed. | Dismissed as to merits challenge. |
| Whether three complaints lacking a brief statement of facts are valid. | Facts are in attached exhibits supporting misconduct. | Rule 6(b) requires a self-contained brief statement of facts. | Dismissed for lack of proper brief statement of facts. |
| Whether supplements can cure deficiencies and support misconduct findings. | Supplements add misconduct evidence. | Supplements considered but may not rescue deficient originals. | Supplements considered; overall complaints not supported. |
| Whether allegations of conspiracy and document removal were sufficiently evidenced. | There was proof of improper removal and cover-up. | No objectively verifiable evidence to prove misconduct. | Dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence. |
| Whether abusive language by complainant affects proceedings or justifies restriction. | Complaints burdened by rhetoric. | Abusive conduct may warrant restriction under Rule 10(a). | Cautioned potential filing restrictions for repetitive or abusive complaints. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 630 F.3d 968, 630 F.3d 968 (9th Cir. 2010) (brief statement of facts required; exhibits not substitute for Rule 6(b))
- In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 569 F.3d 1093, 569 F.3d 1093 (9th Cir. 2009) (lack of objectively verifiable proof for misconduct allegations)
- In re Charge of Judicial Misconduct, 685 F.2d 1226, 685 F.2d 1226 (9th Cir. Jud. Council 1982) (relinquishing merits relitigation through misconduct proceedings)
- In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 552 F.3d 1146, 552 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. Jud. Council 2009) (abusive language can lead to disciplinary caution)