Miscellaneous

Payback, or the Usual Audit? Conflict in Connecticut!

By Anne Skove, Esq.

We've seen judges and court administrators get a bit edgy when put together in the same room, but we've never seen anything like this.

If a judge writes an article entitled "Probate Court Administrator Needs No More Power," does it look suspicious if that administrator orders the judge to reimburse the state for money spent on an audit?

To Judge Kimes of Connecticut's New Canaan Probate Court, it's all very fishy. He sued the administrator, saying there are no guidelines or rules regarding reasonableness of audit fees for individual probate courts. He also does not believe the administrator has the authority to sanction an elected judge.

The administrator allows that there is discretion regarding audits, and grants that their costs may vary, but has called this court's expenses "extreme."

The administrator also maintains that he does have the power to sanction the judge. He sees it as part of his power to contain spending. We're not so sure about this point. Even if it can be done, should it (particularly in an elected-judge jurisdiction)? Anyone from Connecticut (or anywhere else) have a history with a conflict that's gone this far?

See Probate Judge, Administrator Locked in Battle, Kim Martineau, Hartford Courant (March 20, 2008).

Full post as published by court-o-rama.org on March 22, 2008 (boomark / email).