Scholars Say Judge Mingo Should Have Disclosed Ginther Made Call

Document Type

Op-Ed

Publication Date

1-25-2024

Publication Title

Columbus Dispatch

Keywords

Columbus, Greyhound bus, mayor

Abstract

Last year, a Franklin County Municipal Judge presiding over a case between the City of Columbus and Greyhound Bus faced an unusual situation when the Mayor of Columbus contacted her directly on her private cell phone to express his opinion on the case. The Judge promptly disclosed the communication to both parties but kept the caller's identity secret, only revealing that it was “an elected official.” Eventually, she disclosed the Mayor's name, recused herself, and a new judge from outside Columbus was assigned. Despite the incident, the Mayor (whose identity was still unknown) easily won reelection.

The question presented to several ethics-law professors was whether the Judge's decision - to refuse to disclose the identity of the ex-parte communicator - was in line with the Judicial Code of Conduct. Professor Kalir opined that it was not. Insisting on hiding the identity of the ex-parte communicator runs flatly against the main tenets of Judicial Ethics, which includes impartiality, integrity, and independence of the Judiciary. In particular, such refusal violates Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct 2.9, which prohibits ex-parte communications with Judges.

Comments

Full-text available only with subscription

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS