Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Richard Emery

This is the second of two columns analyzing judicial discipline imposed upon judges who attempt to further private interests by invoking their judicial office. The first column reviewed cases—recent and since its inception—of the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct concluding that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, the sanctions imposed fell short of removal from office and, therefore, do not effectively support the public perception of the integrity of the judiciary. This column focuses on Court of Appeals’ precedents in this category of judicial discipline and reviews the basis for holding judges accountable for their off-bench actions.

This premium content is locked for
New York Law Journal subscribers only.

  • Subscribe now to enjoy unlimited access to New York Law Journal content,
  • 5 free articles* across the ALM Network every 30 days,
  • Exclusive access to other free ALM publications
  • And exclusive discounts on ALM events and publications.

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?
Interested in customizing your subscription with Law.com All Access?
Contact our Sales Professionals at 1-855-808-4530 or send an email to groupsales@alm.com to learn more.

Dig Deeper

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2018 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.