XPost: sac.politics, alt.connecticut, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
XPost: talk.politics.guns
The state Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered an unprecedented
investigation that could lead to the removal or suspension of
Superior Court Judge Alice Bruno, who has collected as much as
$400,000 in salary while missing nearly 2½ years of work for what
she describes as health-related reasons.
The justices appointed Robert Devlin, the retired judge and federal
prosecutor recently appointed as the state’s new Inspector General,
to direct the investigation. He is given broad powers, including the
authority to collect all of Bruno’s personnel and health records and
order her to submit to further medical examinations, the ruling
says. The order also requires all judges and judicial branch
employees to cooperate with Devlin, something one judge called
“significant and unprecedented.”
Bruno, 66, has been involved in a strange standoff for more than
three years with the judges of the state judicial branch over her
attendance and performance at work. The branch contends her
prolonged absence while collecting a salary violates the code of
judicial conduct by, among other things, undermining public
confidence in the judiciary. She claims she has become incapacitated
by an undisclosed health condition that has been aggravated by years
of antagonism by senior administrators in the court system.
The standoff has started discussion among lawyers, judges and others
about how judges are appointed and, once appointed, how they are
held accountable. The Supreme Court’s intervention in the standoff
is taking place as the legislature once again embarks on the mostly
secret process of appointing a large number of Superior Court
nominees chosen by Gov. Ned Lamont. The legislature’s judiciary
committee approved 22 new judges earlier this year and Lamont is
expected to submit another 10 nominees before the session ends in
early May.
The Supreme Court decided last year to take charge of the Bruno case
and decide what, if any discipline is appropriate. It is the first
time the court has embarked on a process that could lead to
dismissal of a judge, a constitutional position with protections
greater than those of civil service employees.
Under the high court’s order, Devlin is permitted to appoint
assistants to work on the investigation, all of whom will have
access to the volumes of sealed records and medical reports already
on file.
“In addition, the Office of the Chief Court Administrator, all
Connecticut judges, and all judicial branch employees, shall
promptly and fully cooperate with the investigator and his designees
in connection with the investigation, and shall provide to them any
records or other information upon request,” the order states.
Bruno, who remains a salaried judge in spite of her years-long
absence, also is ordered to “fully and promptly cooperate with the Investigation” including requests by Devlin or his staff for
interviews, records in possession of third parties, and records in
possession of the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities
and the state Judicial Review Council.
Bruno previously filed a complaint with the Commission of Human
Rights and Opportunities, claiming that she is being discriminated
against on the basis of a disability because administrators of the
court system will not accommodate her by providing her with a
stress-free work environment. Chief Court Administrator Patrick
Carroll was required by law to refer Bruno to the Judicial Review
Council, the secretive agency that adjudicates routine complaints
against judges, when she refused his request to submit to an
independent medical examination.
Should Bruno fail to comply with the Supreme Court order, she will
face “further disciplinary proceedings,” according to the order.
Devlin is instructed to keep the investigation secret and submit his
findings when complete to the justices, who will decide at that
point what further steps are required. One section of the court’s
order gives Devlin the authority to explore “alterative resolutions
to the issues underlying this investigation,” a suggestion that he
can negotiate Bruno’s resignation.
The justices declined to discuss the order. Bruno’s lawyer, Jacques Parenteau, said she will cooperate.
“I think we are in an unprecedented area here,” Parenteau said.
“Judge Bruno fully intends to comply with the order of the court.”
Bruno and the judges of the state judicial branch have been at odds
for years over her attendance and job performance, according to
internal agency correspondence. The precise nature of the dispute
remains something of a mystery, because records and correspondence
describing the medical condition or conditions underlying the
disagreement are sealed
She last reported to work on Nov. 14, 2019. In a filing with the
court she claims “the stressful work environment related to the
hostility toward my medical conditions and appointments to treat
ongoing health issues reached a peak” two weeks before then, when
she left work to see her primary care physician about an undisclosed
medical condition. By that point, the judicial branch administration
had become concerned about absences by her and other judges and had
initiated an audit.
Bruno alleged in the filing that, “While I was in the doctor’s
office Judge (Anna) Ficeto continued the harassment directed by
Chief Court Administrator Carroll in leaving a voice mail on my
phone that was critical of my taking time to attend to health
issues.”
According to Bruno, Ficeto, who was supervising the Waterbury
Courthouse, said she had become aware from a colleague that Bruno
was taking a week off for medical purposes. Ficeto asked Bruno to
provide a medical note.
“… So you just need to be aware of the fact that your attendance,
your doctor’s appointments and all those things are being
scrutinized at every level. I understand you’ve got doctor’s
appointments coming up, once again they’re in the middle of the
day,” the affidavit recounts Ficeto as saying on the voicemail. “You
keep digging this hole for yourself Alice, I don’t know how many
ways to tell you that what you’re doing is not acceptable. Call me
when you get a chance. …. Thank you.”
Bruno, appointed by former Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, submitted a letter
from her doctor on Nov. 26, 2019 and said she would be back at work
Dec. 11, 2019. But she submitted another note before then, saying
she was unable to return to work, the affidavit says.
In her affidavit, Bruno claims that at one point the judicial branch
proposed having her return to work in Waterbury — which is
relatively close to her home, but also where Ficeto was working — as
a proposed accommodation. Bruno said she rejected the offer because
Ficeto allegedly had been hostile to her in the past, apart from
what Bruno said she considered to be the antagonistic voice message.
“For example, after I was appointed to Waterbury Judicial District
she would not say hello to me when passing me in building,” Bruno
wrote.
Bruno said what she claimed was mistreatment by colleagues began as
early as 2015.
“I was assigned to domestic violence docket in the Judicial District
of Hartford in July of 2015,” she wrote, also claiming she “was
forced to work with a high temperature and fever because Chief Court Administrator told me that I could not take time off.
“It was also during this assignment that I was informed that I could
not schedule doctor’s appointments on Monday or Friday, or even
during the workday. As will be seen these unreasonable restrictions
on my ability to obtain medical treatment eventually caused me to
experience severe, physical stress and mental distress that resulted
in hospitalization for cardiac distress symptoms in November of
2019,” she wrote.
https://news.yahoo.com/connecticut-supreme-court-orders- investigation-204500539.html
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)