Ex Parte Contact Draws Admonishment
The New York Commission on Judicial Conduct has admonished a Supreme Court justice
Respondent, Lewis J. Lubell, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, was served with a Formal Written Complaint (“Complaint”) dated August 27, 2024 containing one charge. Charge I of the Complaint alleged on August 19, 2022, after having spoken with his friend Mitchell P. Lieberman about a pending matrimonial case that Mr. Lieberman, an attorney, had before Supreme Court Justice Thomas Quinones (Westchester County), respondent initiated an ex parte conversation about that case with Judge Quinones and gave him advice on an issue Mr. Lieberman had raised. The Complaint further alleged that on September 16, 2022, respondent had another ex parte conversation with Judge Quinones about Mr. Lieberman’s case, inter alia asking if Judge Quinones had considered firing his court attorney over the matter raised by Mr. Lieberman.
The stipulated facts note that Respondent was social friends with both the attorney and the fellow justice
On August 17, 2022, Edit Shkreli, [now an elected civil court judge] who at the time was Judge Quinones’ court attorney, conducted a case conference in Allison Cooper Cohen v Jacques Cohen (“Cohen”), a contested matrimonial matter. Mr. Lieberman’s law partner, John O. Farley, appeared with his client, Ms. Cooper Cohen; attorney Stuart P. Slotnick appeared with his client, Mr. Cohen; and attorney Tiffany Gallo appeared on behalf of the children.
On August 19, 2022, Mr. Lieberman spoke to respondent about the August 17 conference in Cohen. Mr. Lieberman complained that Mr. Farley had had a bad experience with Ms. Shkreli, and that she had made an unflattering comment about their firm in the presence of the parties and their attorneys. Mr. Lieberman asked respondent what he should do. Respondent replied that Mr. Lieberman needed to speak to Judge Quinones.
On August 19, 2022, respondent asked Judge Quinones to his chambers and said he had become aware of a problem involving Ms. Shkreli during the August 17 conference conducted by Ms. Shkreli in the Cohen case. Respondent suggested that Judge Quinones insulate Ms. Shkreli from handling any cases involving Mr. Lieberman or his firm, and that he should speak to Mr. Lieberman to work things out.
On September 16, 2022, respondent had another conversation with Judge Quinones in respondent’s chambers. Respondent asked Judge Quinones if he had considered replacing Ms. Shkreli as his court attorney. Judge Quinones replied, in words or substance, that he had no intention of firing her and that she had not done anything to warrant being fired.
Neither respondent nor Judge Quinones disclosed respondent’s conversations with Mr. Lieberman, or respondent’s conversation with Judge Quinones, to the parties, the defense attorney or the attorney for the children.
Respondent has no prior discipline in his twenty year service as a judge and was “contrite and cooperative” in this investigation. (Mike Frisch)