Panel recommends removal of Broward Judge Laura Watson
Broward Circuit Judge Laura Marie Watson.
The Judicial Qualifications Commission dealt a crucial blow to Broward Circuit Judge Laura Marie Watson on Tuesday, recommending that she be removed from the bench after she "sold out her clients, her co-counsel, and ultimately herself" in a 2004 civil lawsuit settlement.
The severe recommendation is a rare one for the JQC, which typically penalizes misconduct with public reprimands. Watson is the first judge in Broward County to face such a recommendation in at least 14 years, which is as far back as the JQC's online records go.
The severe recommendation is a rare one for the JQC, which typically penalizes misconduct with public reprimands. Watson is the first judge in Broward County to face such a recommendation in at least 14 years, which is as far back as the JQC's online records go.
Watson, who was elected in 2012, was accused of unilaterally negotiating a settlement with Progressive Insurance on behalf of clients she represented in a case involving personal injury protection payments. Her clients were doctors who accused Progressive of underpaying them.
Other lawyers representing the same plaintiffs in separate suits accused Progressive of operating in bad faith.
By negotiating a $14.5 million agreement with Progressive, Watson's firm persuaded the plaintiffs to drop the bad faith claims and left the other lawyers in the cold, according to the JQC decision released Tuesday.
The other lawyers sued Watson's firm and won. A Florida Bar complaint followed, but the Bar lost jurisdiction when Watson was elected to the bench. At that point, the JQC took over the complaint.
Although Watson claimed the JQC had no jurisdiction to rule on misconduct allegations stemming from a 10-year-old settlement, the decision written by 5th District Court of Appeal Judge Kerry Evander asserted the JQC's authority.
"JQC proceedings are constitutionally authorized for the alleged misconduct of a judge during the time she was a lawyer," Evander wrote. "There is thus no 'escape to the bench' for lawyers who violate the rules regulating the Florida Bar."
A panel of six commissioners representing the JQC listened to three days of evidence against Watson in February. Watson represented herself at the hearing and insisted she had done nothing wrong.
"At its core, this case is about greed," Evander wrote. "Temptation overrode Judge Watson's ethics, despite advanced warning. … This conduct is 'fundamentally inconsistent with the responsibilities of judicial office,' and mandates removal."
The panel's recommendation was filed with the Florida Supreme Court, which will make the final determination of Watson's fate. According to Mike Schneider, executive director and general counsel of the JQC, the Supreme Court will give Watson an opportunity to respond, and oral arguments may be scheduled at a later date.
"We don't think she did anything wrong that would warrant her removal from the bench," said Bob Sweetapple, a lawyer representing Watson. "We think the recommendation is fatally flawed both legally and factually, and we're looking forward to making our case before the Supreme Court."
Sweetapple noted that not a single client testified against Watson during the JQC hearing.
The last Florida judge to face removal was N. James Turner, an Orange County Circuit judge who in 2011 was removed after a slew of accusations surfaced against him, including complaints from his judicial assistant that he insisted on hugging and kissing her several times a day for months and that he pressured his own mother into making an illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign.
Other lawyers representing the same plaintiffs in separate suits accused Progressive of operating in bad faith.
By negotiating a $14.5 million agreement with Progressive, Watson's firm persuaded the plaintiffs to drop the bad faith claims and left the other lawyers in the cold, according to the JQC decision released Tuesday.
The other lawyers sued Watson's firm and won. A Florida Bar complaint followed, but the Bar lost jurisdiction when Watson was elected to the bench. At that point, the JQC took over the complaint.
Although Watson claimed the JQC had no jurisdiction to rule on misconduct allegations stemming from a 10-year-old settlement, the decision written by 5th District Court of Appeal Judge Kerry Evander asserted the JQC's authority.
"JQC proceedings are constitutionally authorized for the alleged misconduct of a judge during the time she was a lawyer," Evander wrote. "There is thus no 'escape to the bench' for lawyers who violate the rules regulating the Florida Bar."
A panel of six commissioners representing the JQC listened to three days of evidence against Watson in February. Watson represented herself at the hearing and insisted she had done nothing wrong.
"At its core, this case is about greed," Evander wrote. "Temptation overrode Judge Watson's ethics, despite advanced warning. … This conduct is 'fundamentally inconsistent with the responsibilities of judicial office,' and mandates removal."
The panel's recommendation was filed with the Florida Supreme Court, which will make the final determination of Watson's fate. According to Mike Schneider, executive director and general counsel of the JQC, the Supreme Court will give Watson an opportunity to respond, and oral arguments may be scheduled at a later date.
"We don't think she did anything wrong that would warrant her removal from the bench," said Bob Sweetapple, a lawyer representing Watson. "We think the recommendation is fatally flawed both legally and factually, and we're looking forward to making our case before the Supreme Court."
Sweetapple noted that not a single client testified against Watson during the JQC hearing.
The last Florida judge to face removal was N. James Turner, an Orange County Circuit judge who in 2011 was removed after a slew of accusations surfaced against him, including complaints from his judicial assistant that he insisted on hugging and kissing her several times a day for months and that he pressured his own mother into making an illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.