Shlomo Hagler - Recuse Thyself

[consigliere]

The article below, by Lincoln Anderson, is from the August 27, 2003 online edition of The Villager:
 
Tenant activists attack Civil Court judge candidate
  
With primary election day two weeks away, tenant activists are ratcheting up their assault on Shlomo Hagler, one of four candidates running for Civil Court Judge in the Second Municipal Court District.
 
A group of tenant attorneys and activists, who view Hagler as one of their nemeses on the bench, last week sent a letter to Fern Fisher, Civil Court supervising judge, and Ernesto Cavallo, Housing Court supervising judge, regarding "ethics concerns" about Hagler, currently a Housing Court judge.
 
The letter was signed by Judith Goldiner, a Legal Aid Society attorney; Sandra Russo, a Legal Services attorney; Harvey Epstein, of Housing Conservation Coordinators and chairperson of Community Board 3; Stephanie Townsend-Bakare, director of the Citywide Task Force on Housing Court; and John Fisher, director of TenantNet.
 
"We are extremely concerned about actions by Housing Court Judge Hagler, which violate the canons of judicial ethics," the letter stated. "Specifically, Judge Hagler fails…to recuse himself when members of the committee to support Judge Hagler's candidacy for Civil Court judge appear before him, and Judge Hagler's Civil Court literature creates the erroneous impression that he is currently a Civil Court judge…. We believe that both actions require disciplinary action."
 
In early June 2003, Friends of Judge Hagler issued an invitation for a June 19 fundraising cocktail reception at the Embassy Suites Hotel. The invitation listed 66 individuals as members of Judge Hagler's campaign committee. Forty-two of these, or 64 percent, are attorneys who represent landlords in Housing Court who appear before Judge Hagler on a regular basis, the tenant activists claim.
 
"Over the last few months, Judge Hagler has failed to advise litigants when members of the committee to support his candidacy appear before him and has failed…to recuse himself in these cases…. Most members of Judge Hagler's nominating committee are attorneys who appear before him regularly. In addition, he has received a substantial number of donations from firms whose partners and associates appear before him regularly.
 
Nonetheless, Judge Hagler has failed to disclose the potential conflict and has failed to recuse himself."
 
Fisher of TenantNet said there are potentially up to three cases that came before Hagler that raise concern. In one case, an eviction proceeding against a woman named Thea Halo, that came before him on July 16, Hagler did not recuse himself, but did transfer the case to another judge; according to Fisher, Hagler had an obligation to reveal his potential conflict and recuse himself in this case.
 
Second, the tenant activists charge, Hagler's campaign literature is misleading, because he is shown wearing judicial robes and identified as "Judge S. Hagler." This creates the impression that he's a sitting Civil Court judge, giving him an "unfair advantage," they say.
 
Fisher of TenantNet said Hagler is considered a pro-landlord attorney.
 
"If he walks like a duck, if he quacks like a duck, he's a duck," Fisher said. "This guy is considered one of the absolute worst Housing Court judges and he's not fit to be elevated [to Civil Court]."
 
But Michael Oliva, Hagler's campaign manager, blasted the accusations in the letter to the supervising judges as "a complete lie. There's one case that a woman is complaining about. The woman complaining has made complaints about every single judge on the court," he said.
 
Oliva further added that Halo's case first came before Hagler three months before the formation of the campaign committee and that the court date in question was a return date before Hagler. Late yesterday afternoon, Oliva also said that he had received a letter from Daniel L. Greenberg, president and attorney in chief of the Legal Aid Society, saying that Greenberg disproved of the fact that the letter the five activists and attorneys sent questioning Hagler's ethics was on Legal Aid Society letterhead.
 
Greenberg, according to Oliva, said he did not condone using the letterhead and that Legal Aid did not endorse the letter. The Villager was unable to confirm this letter's existence as of press time. In addition, Oliva charged that Harvey Epstein, one of the signatories on the letter critical of Hagler, is on the election committee of Frank Nervo, one of the other three candidates in the Civil Court race.
 
Oliva said Hagler has taken a leave of absence since Aug. 1, so he is not issuing rulings on any cases where he might have a conflict of interest.

As for Hagler wearing judicial robes and with a gavel resting by his hand on his campaign literature, Oliva said there's nothing improper about that.

"That's the idea," he said. "That's our strategy. Housing Court is a part of Criminal (sic) Court. He's not an incumbent. He's running as a Housing Court judge that's running for Civil Court judge. It's not a liability. We think it's an advantage, and we're going to use it as much as we can in the race."
 
Added Hank Sheinkopf, a campaign consultant for Hagler, "He is a fair, unbiased and unbuyable judge. To insure that his standard of probity [is upheld], he has taken a leave from the bench."
 
Oliva added that Hagler has never had a ruling reversed.
 
"I invite you to find another judge that has that record," Oliva said.
 
But Fisher said Hagler's failure to recuse himself from cases where it is called for is an extremely serious issue.
 
"We're concerned about the integrity of the system," Fisher said. "There are tough questions that need to be asked about whether this guy should be on the bench."
 
Although he wasn't a signatory to the letter sent by the five tenant activists and attorneys to the supervising judges about Hagler, attorney Jack Lester, well known Downtown for representing community groups on quality of life lawsuits, said from his time around the courts he knows Judge Hagler to be "pro-landlord. That's the buzz around the building," he said.
 

[kt8744]

Who are the 42 campaign donors who are attorneys?

If someone has the text of the invitation and the list of donors, please post it or provide a link to it.

Thanks.

[TenantNet]

Try this on for size
http://www.tenant.net/Alerts/judges/2nddist2003/Hagler/

more coming

[Cranky Tenant]

I had a case that came before him a couple of years ago, and again earlier this spring. From what I remember he was wearing his robe in court so this seems more like political nitpicking that anything else.

Of course the questions about his contributors and charges that he failed to recuse himself seem far more serious. Looking back maybe its a good thing my case didn't go to trial

<small>[ September 01, 2003, 12:45 AM: Message edited by: Cranky Tenant ]</small>

[TenantNet]

The robe issue isn't trivial; he's not supposed to do it as part of the campaign, but more serious is that the test of his material strongly - and falsely - implies that he is a sitting Civil Court judge.

[Cranky Tenant]

I ran into Hagler about a week ago campaigning outside the local supermarket. The material he gave me is different from the pdf brochure on the ftp site. It also has Hagler in a robe but it begins with ".Nothing can prepare a candidate to be a judge as well as already having been one. Hagler is a presiding Judge in New York City's Housing Court...." and goes on about his rulings in favor of tenants.

Interestingly there are no party affiliations mentioned or endorsements. Considering who his "friends" are, I suspect there are plenty of rulings that didn't favor tenants.

Even so, when you consider how much time attorneys spend kissing judges' butts, at all the social events these people attend, a $500 campaign contribution is just the tip of the iceberg.

[TenantNet]

Maybe he changed his literature in response to the criticism. We've heard of other encounters where he hangs out near Key Foods (did he have the token old ladies and photographers with him?). It's not uncommon to have several pieces of literature in the course of the campaign, but that which we have seen clearly violates the rules. What tenant attorneys tell us is that most of his rulings, and most are pro-landlord - are done off the record (Bench orders) and sometimes he does his business from the back room out of eye and earshot of observers. His most heinous rulings never make it to print. If he were such a pro-tenant guy, then why would he get so much support from the landlord lobby and (on his committee listing) not a single tenant attorney? (some law firms from both sides usually give to all candidates just to cover their ass). Of course he's Democrat - it's a Democratic primary. We have heard horror stories about Hagler.

[Cranky Tenant]

Most likely he saves the token old ladies for the Grand Street Co-ops. I saw him at Morton Williams which is a bit further west and generally attracts a younger crowd..

I presumed he was a democrat but normally judicial candidates are supported by one local democratic club or another. Maybe none of the clubs would support him.

He seemed OK when I came before him in court but then my LL's attorney's firm isn't on Hagler's list of contributors.

<small>[ September 01, 2003, 09:47 AM: Message edited by: Cranky Tenant ]</small>

[Cranky Tenant]

Originally posted by TenantNet:
Maybe he changed his literature in response to the criticism. .

He was back outside the supermarket tonight with new literature. This time the photos show him in ordinary clothes shaking hands with little old ladies outside a supermarket.

Inside theres an "Important Election Warning" claiming he's the victim of political dirty tricks, and a letter from Daniel Greenberg, President of the Legal Aid Society, stating that they're not taking any position on this.

But if people were angry about his old literature they're going to be less happy about the posters. Each of the four lamp posts on the corrner were wrapped with posters that read Judge Hagler For Civil Court, showing Hagler in his robe.

<small>[ September 05, 2003, 12:52 AM: Message edited by: Cranky Tenant ]</small>

[TenantNet]

Did he have the complete Greenberg letter? In the Villager article he mischaracterized what it actually said. It said that Legal Aid was not taking a position on the election itself. Greenberg did not disavow the letter of complaint to the Court Administration, nor did he state the use of Legal Aid stationary was improper. In fact, we know the original letter was approved by the top brass at Legal Aid. We know of no tenant activist (including TenantNet, any tenant attorney or other candidate) that has ever claimed or implied that Legal Aid was taking a position in the election. Indeed, none of the signers of the complaint letter have endorsed any other candidate -- although Hagler tried to claim that, but was shot down on that one in this week's Villager. We may endorse, but haven't decided yet. But we are definitely not part of any other campaign.

So Hagler is denying allegations that were never made. The complaint letter itself was more than proper as it complained about Hagler's ethics violations. IMHO, it is the obligation of any attorney with such knowledge to bring it to the attention of court supervisory personnel. Hagler got caught with his hand in the cookie-jar and now he's complaining.

[kt8744]

FYI-

http://www.thejewishpress.com/news_article.asp?article=2781

They endorse Hagler and slam those who do not.

[Cranky Tenant]

Yes, Hagler's campaign brochure reporduces the entire Greenberg letterm dated August 22nd.

It also says he's been endorsed by Carolyn Maloney, Martin Connor, Sheldon Silver, Lower East Side Democratic Club, Harry S Truman Democratic Cub, and United Democratic Organization.

One big question, if Hagler feels he's being characterized unfairly, why doesn't he just return the questionable contributions? It's really not all that much money.

[TenantNet]

He got $11,000 from landlord lawyers - at least from his initial filing in July. He's part of Shel Silver's Grand Street enclave - where they grow landlord lawyers on trees. Hagler was trained by Martin Shulman, who worked for and promoted landlord harassment before Silver put him on the bench. If they put the entire Greenberg letter in the brochure, he does not disavow any of the content of the original complaint letter, nor does he state that it was improper for the complaint letter to be on Legal Aid stationary (which is what Hagler's people told the Villager). Greenberg (erroneously concludes) the original letter was being used to smear Hagler. But we know Silver's office called him up and told him that without anything to back it up. The original letter was dated 8/21 and Greenberg's letter was dated 8/22. The Villager article didn't come out until 8/27 and we didn't say anything about this at TenantNet until 9/3. The real jist of the Greenberg letter was to dispel any notion that Legal Aid had taken any position on the election - and no one ever claimed they did.

But more to the point, Hagler is trying to turn the focus away from his ethics violations and blame the complainers. How many landlords do you see doing that? He's learned from all his contributors.

[Cranky Tenant]

Originally posted by TenantNet:
He got $11,000 from landlord lawyers - at least from his initial filing in July..

Bad enough that they're growing lawyers on trees but they probably take the voting booths door-to-door, down Grand Street, on election day.

$11,000 for a judge sounds like a bargain. Too bad tenants haven't used the same tactic.

[TenantNet]

No one is claimiing LL support isn't legal. But if he decides to go down the dark path, then he shouldn't pretend he's pro-tenant, and he should disclose and recuse when any of those LL attorney appear before him as required by law. That is the ethical violation. Of course he's claimin it's a smear campaign, but one man's smear is another man's exposé. We're shedding light on that which he wants to keep hidden.