Embattled Oakland County judge asked to recuse herself in prosecutor's cases

Yahoo

a day ago

The Oakland County Prosecutor's Office began to pull its cases from under the thumb of embattled District Judge Kirsten Nielsen Hartig on the morning of June 10 amid fallout from a formal complaint issued by the state's judicial oversight body earlier this month.
During Hartig's June 10 docket at the 52-4 District Court in Troy, the prosecutor's office — which is named in some accusations in the complaint — motioned for Hartig to recuse herself from its first two cases of the day. Hartig declined to do so but was later overruled by her chief judge. So began a dance of repeating the motion on other cases tied to the prosecutor's office and Hartig adjourning them to give the chief judge time to rule, as defendants went back to jail cells or workdays.
There was no immediate indication that morning that Chief Judge Travis Reeds would rule differently on the adjourned cases, though Hartig noted from the bench that he had not reviewed a transcript of the hearing with her reasoning for not recusing herself. Bill Mullan, public information officer for Oakland County, confirmed the chief judge's decisions, which attorneys had relayed to Hartig during her docket. Mullan said that the cases would be reassigned at random to other district court judges.
More: Complaint: Oakland County Judge Kirsten Nielsen Hartig created 'climate of fear'
Reeds previously said Hartig should be temporarily removed from her docket amid the oversight case, and the county reported he made a request to do so.
Hartig has been under fire in recent years, both by Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald and a former court administrator who got a $100,000 settlement in a whistleblower and unlawful termination lawsuit tied to Hartig.
Then on June 4, the oversight body, the Judicial Tenure Commission, issued a rare public complaint against the judge. The complaint effectively launches a court-like process that, at its most severe, could result in the Michigan Supreme Court suspending or removing the judge.
Key in the complaint: The commission attempted to redact, but left visible in some formats, that a psychological evaluation of the judge in 2024 deemed her at the time to be ''unsafe to practice' due to disruptive behavior and personality dysfunction.' What was deemed at risk was not immediately clear.
The commission openly accused Hartig of misdeeds, including creating 'a climate of fear' among workers at the courthouse, improperly dismissing multiple cases without prejudice due to a grudge with the prosecutors tied to scheduling, and mistreating that former court administrator.
More: Authority got psych report saying Oakland Judge Hartig was 'unsafe to practice' months ago
A spokesperson for the judge, Daniel Cherrin of Royal Oak-based public affairs and communications firm North Coast Strategies, declined to comment on the mental health aspect but issued a statement at the time calling the commission process 'flawed." He said Hartig has patiently waited for the chance to address the allegations against her.
In court on June 10, Hartig spoke out against the recusal motions to start.
Her docket was underway shortly after 9 a.m., with the judge making mostly default judgments in landlord-tenant issues until a case involving the Oakland County Prosecutor's Office came up.
Assistant Prosecutor Bob Zivian came to the podium and when given the chance said for the first time a statement he'd be repeating for numerous cases: that as 'everyone' in the courtroom knew, the Judicial Tenure Commission issued a complaint, that her former and current chief judges were among complainants who could testify against her, and that it was clear the office could not get a fair hearing in the courtroom. 'Respectfully,' he asked her to recuse herself.
Hartig, who had nodded at times during the soliloquy, responded using 'respectfully' herself. She said that the prosecutor's office was aware of the oversight investigation before the formal complaint was issued, and argued there had been no problems or concerns raised.
She said, in the back-and-forth across two cases, that those in the prosecutor's office issued grievances against her and that she had made attorney grievances against them — specifically McDonald and Assistant Prosecutor Jeffrey Hall — within the last several years.
She was unaware of where her attorney grievances landed but said the only thing that changed was the public nature of the complaint against her.
Zivian, however, said there were aspects of the complaint that his office was not aware of before.
Taylor judge called chief judge names, flipped off security cameras, complaint says
'No teeth': Cases of 2 embattled Michigan judges highlight concerns with accountability
Zivian stepped into a private room several times, including with one individual's defense attorney and Chief Public Defender Paulette Loftin. He ultimately relayed to Hartig that he had appealed to Chief Judge Reeds by Zoom and the chief judge ruled in his favor.
Between the back-and-forth of the attorneys and the judge, and the judge checking her computer for responses from Reeds, it was said that the chief judge believed Zivian would need to make his motion on every single case.
And so, he did. Hartig continued to deny the request, sometimes elaborating for defendants who hadn't been in the courtroom. Defense attorneys were given the chance to weigh in, and then Hartig adjourned their cases so Zivian didn't have to repeatedly jump on a Zoom call after each one to get a ruling from the chief judge. He could do that during the one or two-week adjournment, she said.
Zivian was still repeating his refrain for various cases as the clock ticked toward noon.
Following one such hearing, Sterling Heights-based attorney Janet Szpond bemoaned that her client's case might have been dismissed if it weren't for the recusal matter.
She didn't know the ins and outs discussed in court regarding Hartig's complaint but said her client was accused of failing to return a rental car and was due in court for his preliminary examination. She believed a witness hadn't shown up, so she thought the matter may have been dismissed on June 10.
Instead, her client confirmed with her that he could go back to work and jogged off.
'It's just extremely inconvenient,' Szpond said.
Oakland County Chief Assistant Prosecutor David Williams said in a call along with his office's public information officer, Jeff Wattrick, that while matters were still evolving, it was not believed there would be great delays in the court system due to the maneuver.
He also said Hartig's complaint involved more than just the dismissals involving his office, and his office was unaware of that previously. But the complaint also affirmed the office's stance regarding the judge's bias against them.
Wattrick, in a statement, said that people are entitled to cases decided 'based on the law rather than personal animosity.'
'Our only goal in this matter is to ensure justice — that victims' stories are heard and that The People always receive a fair hearing before the court,' he said.
Cherrin, Hartig's spokesperson, said that the prosecutor's office had appeared in front of the judge hundreds of times before and that she continues to sit on the bench. He pointed to her comments on the motion made in court.
Hartig was given 14 days to issue a formal response to the June 4 complaint.
This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Embattled Oakland County judge asked to recuse self in multiple cases