There is no "good faith" when a judge does not disclose her conflict of interest

Judge Cathryn M. Doyle, a Surrogate's Court Justice, has been removed by the New York State Commission for Judicial Conduct for presiding over cases where her friends appeared in front of her as attorneys and for failure to disclose her conflicts of interest.


In defense of herself, Judge Doyle claimed that she failed to disclose the conflicts of interest "mistakenly" and "in good faith".


Now, how can a person fail to disclose a conflict of interest "in good faith"?  Especially when that person is a judge of many years, and a lawyer of 35 years, admitted since 1979, according to the New York State attorney directory? I do not believe Judge Doyle could pretend she did not know the applicable rules of disqualification or at least of disclosure...


The value of disclosure is for other attorneys and parties to be able to weigh that information and apply for recusal of the judge. 


It was not for Judge Doyle to decide whether to disclose a conflict of interest or not, such a disclosure is mandatory. 


By not disclosing her conflicts of interest, Judge Doyle undermined people's trust in the integrity of the judiciary and does not belong on the bench.


Judge Doyle, as every other judge presiding over people's lives and fates, should be squeaky clean in her performance.  Anything less than that is unacceptable.


I believe that the NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct did the right thing (for a change) by removing judge Doyle. 


NYS Commission should be consistent in its actions, though, and apply the same standard of removal to all judges who fail to disclose their conflicts of interest.


In 2014 Judge Doyle was removed for presiding over cases of (1) her friend, (2) her personal attorney, (3) her former attorney .


In 2013 Judge George was removed for presiding over cases of friends.


Judge Carl F. Becker, the Acting Supreme Court justice of the Delaware County Supreme Court remains on the bench, even though he openly presided over the case of a close friend and failed to disclose his multiple conflicts of interest in multiple cases in that court and in other courts, and he openly presided over the case where his personal attorney was in front of him - and granted the victory to that attorney. 


Why should Judge Becker be given a special treatment by the Commission? He knows somebody who protects him?




And Judge Becker does not even use "good faith" excuses, he arrogantly acts as if the courtroom is his own fiefdom - his and his friends'.