Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In re Nettles-Nickerson

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 13, 2008No. Docket No. 133929Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

WEAVER J.

(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur in the majority’s decision and reasons for removing respondent Judge Beverley Nettles-Nickerson from her current position as judge of the 30th Circuit Court.

I dissent from the majority’s decision to assess against the respondent any costs of the Judicial Tenure Commission proceeding. As I stated previously in regard to the proposed assessment of costs against a respondent judge:

*324[T]here is no constitutional authority to assess costs against a judge. Subsection 2 of Const 1963, art 6, § 30 provides that “the supreme court may…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. In Re BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. In the Matter of Del RioMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  3. In the Matter of ProbertMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  4. State v. EubanksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
  5. In Re FerraraMichigan Supreme Court · 1998

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API