Dismissals with Warnings

In cases where the JCC found that the judge's conduct constituted troubling but relatively minor misbehavior for which no public sanction was warranted a "Dismissal with warning" may be issued.

Dismissals with warnings are allowed pursuant to footnote 5 of In re Anderson, 2004 UT 7, and have been incorporated into Rule 595-4-1 of the Utah Administrative Code. Dismissals with warnings are summarized in the JCC’s annual report and on the JCC website, without inclusion of the judge’s name or court. In addition, dismissals with warnings are often discussed during ethics presentations at judicial conferences, again without identifying the judge or the judge’s court. The purpose in doing that, of course, is to help other judges avoid similar violations.

A dismissal with a warning is in fact a dismissal. It is disclosed by the JCC only to the judge and the complainant. Note that the statutory confidentiality provisions only apply to JCC Commissioners and staff. There is nothing that prohibits the judge or the complainant from further disclosing or distributing a dismissal with a warning. A dismissal with warning could become public if the judge were to later commit judicial misconduct that warrants a public sanction. Pursuant to statute, the dismissal with warning would be reported to the Supreme Court as part of the subsequent discipline case, and would likely be made public by the Supreme Court at that time.