Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re Seitz

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1993No. 90794, (Calendar No. 1)Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLevin, J.

The majority states that Monroe Probate Judge James McCauley Seitz, both by his actions and his statements, as he went about the exercise of his duties, had "demonstrated an attitude, a mind-set, that leaves us firmly convinced that he is woefully unfit for judicial office. He not only exhibited a lack of the qualities from which judicial temperament springs, but he has exhibited a dis*629tinct pattern of injudicious temperament and conduct.”1

The majority finds graphic support for some of these conclusions in a personal memo and cassette tape from Judge Seitz to his secretary, Cindy Paz Cameron,2…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Matter of HagueMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. In the Matter of MikesellMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Sword v. SwordMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
  4. In the Matter of BennettMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Mead v. BatchlorMichigan Supreme Court · 1990

20 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