Allan Zaleski In The News: Norfolk Judge's Record, Demeanor Put Reappointment Under a Cloud


Posted on Feb 04, 2008

Norfolk judge's record, demeanor put reappointment under a cloud

Norfolk Circuit Judge Chuck Griffith, who served eight years as the city's elected top prosecutor before joining the bench, faces a fight to retain his robe.

Two weeks ago, a state senator removed Griffith's name from the list of judges to be considered for an additional term. No hearing has been set to review his reappointment for a second eight-year term, but local legislators said Friday that they have received dozens of phone calls and letters in support of and opposition to Griffith's continued service.

Griffith was named to the bench in 2000 and ran as a Republican for commonwealth's attorney in 1992.

In a letter to Del. Johnny Joannou, D-Portsmouth, dated Dec. 18, Norfolk lawyer Allan Zaleski asked Joannou not to reappoint Griffith, saying, "The citizens of Virginia are entitled to judges who are fair, courteous, knowledgeable and unbiased. I do not believe Judge Griffith possesses any of these qualities."

Griffith's supporters say he is a hard-working judge who has heard thousands of cases. Norfolk Circuit Court Clerk George Schaefer said in a letter to a local legislator that Griffith has "the professionalism befitting the tradition of justice in this circuit."

Griffith declined to comment this week, saying the Canons of Judicial Ethics prevent him from talking about pending cases.

While some have suggested that the campaign to oust Griffith is a political maneuver, both Democratic and Republican lawmakers say additional scrutiny of the judge is not motivated by partisanship.

"There's nothing political about this," said Sen. Kenneth Stolle, R-Virginia Beach, who considers a Griffith a friend.

"Some of the judge's decisions are not consistent with the demeanor that we expect from judges," said Stolle, who is a Courts of Justice Committee member. "There are some serious allegations and some comments that have been generated by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court about decisions that he's made, and they are clearly legitimate issues of concerns that we have to address."

Zaleski's letter and materials that accompanied it have been distributed to members of the House of Delegates and Senate Courts of Justice committees. The Virginian-Pilot received a copy of the packet, and verified information included in it with court records.

Zaleski cited six cases that he said "illustrate an abuse of authority" by Griffith. In one of the cases, the Supreme Court rebuked Griffith for failing to recuse himself from a case in which Zaleski was the defense lawyer.

In their decision, issued in June 2006, the justices wrote that Griffith showed bias by removing Zaleski from the list of court-appointed attorneys, attempting to remove him from the case, and referring to Zaleski's actions as "shenanigans."

"Judge Griffith's prejudice or bias against Zaleski is repeatedly reflected in this record and such bias does raise questions about Judge Griffith's ability to be impartial in this proceeding," the justices wrote.

Zaleski pointed to other cases currently pending before the state's Court of Appeals and Supreme Court. In one case, Griffith fined lawyer John McNally more than $14,000. The Supreme Court has accepted the case for argument, but no date has been set.

Briefs submitted to the high court by both sides outline the case. Griffith sanctioned McNally in December 2006, a month after McNally's client filed for bankruptcy on the evening before the scheduled start of a jury trial on a lawsuit.

The plaintiffs' lawyer argued that McNally should have notified them sooner that his client intended to file for bankruptcy. Griffith asked the plaintiffs' lawyer, Daniel Warman, to tally up costs and attorney's fees for the week before the trial, and fined McNally that amount plus the costs for summoning a jury.

In McNally's brief to the Supreme Court, he argues that Griffith should have given him a hearing at a later date to defend himself against the request for sanctions, rather than proceeding with the hearing on the spot. Attorney-client privilege of confidentiality barred him from notifying the plaintiffs or the court about his client's intentions, McNally argues.

Warman wrote in his brief that McNally did not object to the request for sanction at the time it was made, nor did he request a hearing afterward. Warman wrote that Griffith found that McNally had exhibited a pattern of behavior throughout the case that showed an intent to delay the proceedings and increase the cost of litigation for the plaintiffs.

In his letter to Joannou, Zaleski wrote that Griffith has a "tendency to punish lawyers or litigants who displease him."

Zaleski also pointed to contempt of court findings Griffith made against defense lawyers Kenneth Singleton and Gordon Zedd in separate cases in September and October. The cases are similar: Zedd and Singleton each contacted the prosecutor handling the case against his client to postpone proceedings. Prosecutors agreed in both cases and signed an order to present to Griffith.

Zedd and Singleton advised their clients that they did not need to appear in court. In each case, Griffith questioned why the defense lawyer had released his client without court approval. He held both lawyers in contempt, fining Singleton $250 and Zedd $50.

Zedd and Singleton have appealed their convictions. Both declined to comment. The Court of Appeals has not set dates for the hearings.

In his letter to Joannou, Zaleski argued that Griffith's contempt rulings show a "continuing abuse of power."

Stolle said he has spoken with Griffith about the criticisms lodged against him.

"If Chuck can come in and persuade the committee that he understands what type of demeanor and behavior we expect from a judge, and that his first term has been a learning lesson for him, then I think he has a chance of being re-elected," Stolle said.

Sen. Ralph Northam, D-Norfolk, said Griffith came to Richmond last week to discuss his reappointment.

"The fairest way that I can think of to deal with this is to offer him an interview with the Courts of Justice Committee," said Northam.

Sen. Yvonne Miller, D-Norfolk, declined to comment.

Del. Paula Miller, D-Norfolk, said she has received letters of support for Griffith at a ratio of 10 to 1 negative opinion. One of them was from her husband, Circuit Court Clerk Schaefer, who called Griffith one of the court's hardest-working judges.

Donald C. Schultz, president of the Norfolk & Portsmouth Bar Association, wrote a letter supporting an impartial hearing process for Griffith.

Stanley Barr, a past president of the association, said he called Northam to say Griffith is "a very good judge" and that he and other lawyers "have a high regard for his abilities."

Norfolk lawyer Charles McPhillips called Griffith one of the brightest and most fair-minded judges he knows.

"If you have a tough case and need someone who will wrestle with the issues, he's the type of judge you want to get," McPhillips said.

By Michelle Washington
The Virginian-Pilot
© January 26, 2008
Published on HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com
(http://hamptonroads.com)

back to top


Bookmark and Share

Ask an AttorneyAsk an Attorney
Free Consultation

Name:

Phone:

Email:

Tell us more:


Michael S. Weisberg, P.C.
112 College Place
Norfolk, VA 23510
Phone: (757) 622-7740
Fax: (757) 533-9223
Toll Free: (800) 690-0235

Get Directions

Map / Directions
©2010 Michael S. Weisberg, P.C., All Rights Reserved, Reproduced with Permission
Attorney website design by Foster Web Marketing, the best attorney website design solution on the Web offering search engine optimization for attorneys, lawyer website design, video for attorneys, and more.
Get SEO Tips from The Attorney Internet Marketing Blog
Virginia personal injury attorney, Norfolk VA nursing home abuse neglect, VA car accident lawyer, Virginia Beach truck crash help, Tidewater medical malpractice, Virginia DUI arrest, Norfolk criminal defense law firm

Served By: A