Fogbow

This is Part 1 of Bloomberg Law’s investigation into the relationships in the Houston bankruptcy court. Read Part 2: How Four Judges Kept Romance Allegations Quiet for Two Years

Sex, Secrets Trigger Downfall of Star Texas Bankruptcy Judge
By James Nani and Ronnie Greene

April 30, 2024, 11:00 AM; Updated May 1, 2024, 11:20 PM

• Under David Jones, big-dollar Houston bankruptcies exploded
  Relationship with local lawyer exposed ‘swamp’ of Houston court
  At “Meatfest,” the judge and the lawyers were all smiles.

Judge David R. Jones, who had worked for years to make Houston a destination for high-dollar bankruptcy litigation, can be seen in an October 2022 photo huddled at the barbecue with local attorneys who brought cases before him and also formed a cooking crew.

Among them is Elizabeth Freeman, who had known Jones for years, clerked for him—and had an intimate relationship with him.

That they had been together at least since 2017 was not yet public knowledge, but an anonymous letter alleging favoritism would eventually reveal the relationship.

The revelations it contained cast a shadow upon the court Jones built to prominence, sparked scrutiny of the loose rules allowing lawyers to judge-shop their cases, and prompted a Justice Department unit to try to recover millions from Jackson Walker, Freeman’s former firm. The issues are so severe federal officials are pushing to reopen scores of Jones’ cases.

Still, at the annual cookout all appeared to be well.

Jones, Freeman, and other attorneys can be seen wearing matching aprons embroidered with their team’s name “CFN,” or Chili F’n Nelson, in the photo posted on Instagram by Albert Alonzo, then Jones’ case manager. The lawyers included some who attended evidence classes Jones taught and some, like Freeman, who were partners with Jackson Walker. The Texas law firm earned millions of dollars in fees in cases overseen by Jones while the two lived together.

Their relationship would eventually have consequences for a court and a firm that have handled high-profile bankruptcies, including Neiman Marcus and Gulfport Energy Corp.

By December 2022, Freeman had left Jackson Walker and started her own firm. Jones’ and Freeman’s years-long romantic involvement—and ownership of a house together—remained hidden until the anonymous letter was finally made public on October 6, 2023.

Jones announced his resignation nine days later as the scandal rocked the bankruptcy world, particularly in Houston, where a clubby, find-a-work-around culture helped put the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas among the top venues for large Chapter 11 bankruptcies.



https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bankruptc ... ptcy-judge

Michigan judge loses docket after she’s recorded insulting gay people and Black people

Updated 5:41 PM CEST, September 6, 2024

PONTIAC, Mich. (AP) — A suburban Detroit judge is no longer handling cases after a court official turned over recordings of her making anti-gay insults and referring to Black people as lazy.

Oakland County Probate Judge Kathleen Ryan was removed from her docket on Aug. 27 for unspecified misconduct. Now the court’s administrator has stepped forward to say he blew the whistle on her, secretly recording their phone calls.

“I just want to make it right. ... I want to keep my job and do it in peace,” Edward Hutton told WXYZ-TV. “And I want the people in Oakland County that come to court to get a fair shake, to have their day in court, to have an unbiased trier of fact.”

The judge didn’t talk to the TV station, but her attorneys, Gerald Gleeson and Thomas Cranmer, said: “We look forward to vindicating Judge Ryan in the appropriate forum.”

Probate judges in Michigan handle wills and estates, guardianships and cases that involve the state’s mental health laws.

In the phone recordings, Ryan uses a anti-gay slur against David Coulter, the county’s highest elected official, who is gay. She also referred to Blacks in the U.S. as lazy.



https://apnews.com/article/michigan-jud ... 189eb63a3d

Ohio Supreme Court orders immediate removal of Stow Municipal Judge Kim Hoover

April Helms Akron Beacon Journal
2024/09/24 This story was updated to add new information.

The Ohio Supreme Court has ordered the immediate removal of longtime judge Kim Hoover from office.

The court announced Tuesday that Hoover, of Stow Municipal Court, also has been suspended from practicing law for 18 months, with six months stayed, in connection with accusations against him in the way he collected court fines and fees.

In February 2023, the court's Board of Professional Conduct recommended that Hoover be immediately barred from practicing law and suspended from his office without pay for two years. The board's recommendation followed an investigation and September 2022 hearings after a series of complaints filed starting in December 2021 claiming that Hoover was using illegal and coercive tactics to recover court-ordered fees from defendants.

Hoover appealed this sentence, with oral arguments taking place before the Ohio Supreme Court on May 17, 2023. He had remained on the bench pending the outcome. Hoover would have been ineligible to run for judge again in 2025, when his term was to expire, because he turned 70 this year.

Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justices Michael P. Donnelly, Melody Stewart, and Joseph T. Deters joined Tuesday's opinion. Justice R. Patrick DeWine concurred in judgment only. Justice Jennifer Brunner did not participate in the case.




https://eu.beaconjournal.com/story/news ... 360116007/

Justices rule Kim Hoover coerced defendants to pay costs, fines

According to the Ohio Supreme Court's ruling, Hoover had unjustly imprisoned two defendants — one for four days and the other for seven days — and 14 defendants were coerced into paying costs and fines under threats of being sent to prison, which under Ohio law is illegal.

"Hoover’s overzealous collection of unsegregated fines and costs manifested a bias against those of lower socioeconomic status, a bias that … was readily apparent during his interactions with these defendants," Tuesday's ruling stated. "Hoover leaned into the idea of a debtors’ prison, unlawfully incarcerating or threating to incarcerate individuals for nonpayment of fines without due process, and unconstitutionally incarcerating or threatening to incarcerate individuals for nonpayment of court costs. And he routinely failed to inform the defendants of their right to counsel. In addition to harming the defendants, Hoover purposely involved the families of the defendants — innocent people — to extort money from them. The families of the defendants were not the wrongdoers, and Hoover’s endeavor to squeeze money from them so that they might keep their loved ones out of jail was reprehensible."