On Tuesday, December 3, 2024, the Times Union reported that a dispute among Colonie town justices had arisen from allegations involving unethical conduct. Town Justice David R. Green has accused his colleagues of targeting him with baseless claims suggesting he collaborated with local attorney T. Padric Moore to improperly handle eviction cases related to his private law practice.
The controversy began in March when Moore attempted to file paperwork for four eviction cases. His submissions were rejected by Town Court Clerk Mary Falace, who cited directives from senior Town Justice Andrew C. Sommers. Following this, Moore filed a petition in the state Supreme Court to compel Falace to accept his documents. A recent ruling favored Moore, but left the allegations against Green unresolved.
Green, who has a law practice that focuses on evictions and real estate, asserted that the claims of a secret business relationship between him and Moore are unfounded. He stated that evidence presented in the case showed no basis for the allegations, emphasizing that he and Moore do not share a personal or professional relationship beyond being colleagues in the same field.
The situation escalated after a tenant facing eviction contacted Falace, raising concerns about a potential conflict of interest due to Green’s representation of the landlord. Green maintained that he had recused himself from a related small-claims case filed by the tenant against the landlord, suggesting that confusion may have arisen during the tenant’s discussions with the court clerk.
Falace’s investigation revealed similarities in the formatting of eviction filings submitted by Moore and those previously filed by Green. Green explained that his representation of the landlord was strictly for estate planning and not related to the eviction matter. He contended that any similarities in document formatting stemmed from shared practices within the legal community.
The root of the eviction proceedings can be traced back to a complaint the tenant lodged with the town’s code enforcement department regarding her apartment’s condition. Green communicated with the tenant, advising her that she needed to vacate the property due to zoning violations. When the tenant did not respond swiftly, the case was referred to Moore for eviction proceedings.
Concerned about potential ethical violations, Justice Sommers consulted with fellow Justice Norman C. Massry and sought guidance from the state Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics. The committee opined that if credible evidence existed suggesting Green was using Moore as a “straw-man attorney,” Sommers had an obligation to report the matter to the state Commission on Judicial Conduct.
In a recent ruling, acting state Supreme Court Justice Kimberly A. O’Connor upheld Moore’s right to have his filings accepted, stating that Falace had failed to fulfill her duty in this regard. However, O’Connor clarified that her decision did not address the ethical allegations raised against Green, leaving the matter unresolved.
Green pointed out that an email from Sommers to the ethics committee indicated that Sommers had no direct evidence to support his concerns about Green’s conduct. The situation intensified following a reported encounter between Sommers and Green, during which Green allegedly mentioned that Moore had covered for him in court cases. This led Sommers to instruct Falace to block Moore’s filings due to an undisclosed ethical issue.
Green expressed frustration over the situation, describing it as embarrassing and a significant overreaction by his co-judges, who he believes acted on insufficient circumstantial evidence. Moore corroborated Green’s assertions, stating they are essentially competitors in their legal practices, with no shared clients or fees.
The complexity of the case deepened when the Colonie Town Attorney, E. Guy Roemer, attempted to seal the ethics advisory opinion that led to the dispute over Moore’s filings. However, the state Supreme Court denied this motion, thereby maintaining transparency in the proceedings.
The ongoing investigation and the ethical implications surrounding the justices’ actions continue to cast uncertainty over the operations of the Town Court, which is among the busiest in the region. As the situation develops, Green remains apprehensive about potential consequences from the state Commission on Judicial Conduct. He clarified that, as of now, he does not face any formal judicial complaints, though he acknowledged the possibility of future scrutiny.
Source: Times Union
