In Re Kroger
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Per curiam
Respondent is charged with violating Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct. A four-member majority of the Judicial Conduct Board found that certain public statements made by respondent were false, deceptive, and/or misleading, and concluded that respondent should be disciplined for violating the Code. The Board could not recommend a sanction because five members did not concur, as required by our rules. Rules of Supreme Court for Disciplinary Control of Judges, Rule 6(17). Respondent argues that the Board’s findings are erroneous, and urges this Court to dismiss the charges against…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Inquiry Concerning DaveySupreme Court of Florida · 1994
- In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against RitchieWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- In Re O'DeaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
- In re KileyNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Patterson v. Council on Probate Judicial ConductSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Disciplinary Counsel v. O'NeillOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- In re the Inquiry Concerning McCormickSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
- In Re BoardmanSupreme Court of Vermont · 2009
- Disciplinary Counsel v. ParkerOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- Velardo v. OvittSupreme Court of Vermont · 2007
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.