In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge, Royster
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER OF CENSURE
On 2 November 2006, the Judicial Standards Commission (Commission) recommended that the Supreme Court censure respondent for participating in an ex parte conference with a defendant’s attorney and entering an order as a result thereof, without notice to the plaintiff and without taking evidence.
On 17 May 2006, the Commission’s counsel filed a complaint alleging that respondent “engaged in conduct inappropriate to his judicial office.” In particular, it alleged that on 13 July 2005, respond ent participated in an ex parte conference with an attorney representing a defendant in…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 53 PeoplesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- In Re Inquiry Concerning Judge NowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Calloway v. Ford Motor CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- In the Matter of CrutchfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 44, MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In Re BadgettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008
- Ross v. ROSS (NOW OSBORNE)Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
- In Re Inquiry Concerning BadgettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008
- Duplin County DSS ex rel. Pulley v. FrazierCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
- Pope v. PopeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.