Sign up for 5280's weekly e-newsletters. Want the latest restaurant scoop? The latest happenings around town? Access to exclusive events and deals just for 5280 readers? 
Among the complaints filed against Judge Edward Nottingham is one I find pretty silly. In a written opinion in a case in which he thought one of the attorneys did a lousy job of presenting his case, he inserted a picture of a pig with lipstick. I haven’t seen the picture, but I imagine it would be similar to the one above.
Nottingham used the picture a year ago in commenting on an attorney for a school district that was being sued for allegedly discriminating in employment. The judge said the attorney had used examples in a written argument that had nothing to do with the point of the argument.
“Putting lipstick on a pig” is a common term used when one attempts to make something unappealing, more attractive and fails.
The complaint was filed by Kenneth Smith of Golden.
He sued because the high court would not admit him to the bar because he refused to submit to a mental status examination for the state board of law examiners. The appeals court concluded in 2003 Nottingham was correct in throwing out Smith’s lawsuit.
…Smith over the years has sued several judges and regularly uses the judicial system to complain about alleged unfair treatment he has received from judges. Smith and others have an ongoing crusade, using Internet web sites, against alleged misconduct by judges.
Tenth Circuit Judge Paul Kelly, while not caring for the use of the photo and declaring it in bad taste, resolved the issue in favor of Judge Nottingham.
[Judge] Kelly concluded Nottingham’s use of the pig picture “does not rise to the level of treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious or hostile manner.” That phrase refers to a type of misconduct specified in federal court system rules.
Bloggers use the term and photo frequently. Maybe Judge Nottingham should start a blog. What might be frowned on in a judicial opinion would be a perfect fit for this medium. I bet if he had a blog it would be entertaining, scathing and illuminating. Someone ought to suggest it to him.
Posted 6/5/2008 at 11:29 am by Jeralyn Merritt
People :: Permalink :: Comments (2)
Why don’t reporters do real reporting, as opposed to blindly parroting what others have said?
If anyone had bothered to look here (http://www.knowyourcourts.com/Smith/08-10-372-13/2008-03-19_fifthEthicsComplaint.pdf) and here (http://www.knowyourcourts.com/Smith/08-10-372-13/2008-04-03_fifthEthicsComplaintSupplement.pdf), he or she would have learned that the complaint was not about Judge Naughty’s pig but rather, about his pattern of abusive behavior toward litigants, his arrogant disregard for the law, and his colleagues’ decision to cover for him. See http://www.knowyourcourts.com/featured_article.htm for a thorough analysis of Judge Kelly’s opinion from the one who knows it best.
You can’t give most modern reporters a story if you gift-wrap it.
Denver Chief U.S. District Court Judge Edward Nottingham resigned to end the judicial misconduct investigations against him.
There are now five other public federal judicial misconduct investigations pending. [ U.S. Magistrate Judge Alan J. Baverman, U.S. District Court Judge Samuel Kent, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Porteous, U.S. District Court Judge Manuel Real, and Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski].
It appears Magistrate Judge Alan J. Baverman will likely be the next to resign [ see http://BavermanMisconduct.com ] as his judicial complaint warranted the formation of a judicial investigative committee for supported allegations of extortion of $1,000,000, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, perjury and threats of violence.
According to a recent October 13, 2008 article — there have only been 18 federal investigative committee formed in response to the 1,454 federal judicial complaints filed in the U.S. over the last few years [ see http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6054972.html ]. This article describes the federal judicial misconduct investigative process.
The frequent corruption headlines relating to the financial markets and politics should be a lesson to us all — we should always act to rid ourselves of corruptions instead of limiting our actions to only instances that very directly affect our own lives. Unchecked corruption does eventually affect us all.
I hope readers of this post agree and will actually make an effort to ensure the pending judicial investigations receive a proper ‘open-eye’ investigation. Make some calls, send some emails, forward information to others who may actually make a difference, or volunteer your own efforts.
As Edmund Burke stated in 1770, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing” and “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” These words are as true today as they were centuries ago.
Please do not sit idle. Do not allow our system of justice to follow the path of our financial system.