Failure to exhaust administrative remedy held a bar to seeking judicial relief
Holzman v Commission on Judicial. Conduct, 2012 NY Slip Op 01577, Appellate Division, First Department
Holzman v Commission on Judicial. Conduct, 2012 NY Slip Op 01577, Appellate Division, First Department
Surrogate Court Judge Lee L. Holzman sought a stay of disciplinary proceedings brought against him by the Commission on Judicial Conduct pending the resolution of the criminal prosecution of a witness to the disciplinary proceedings.
Supreme Court denied issuing the stay and the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s ruling.
The Appellate Division said that the denial of the petition and dismissal of the proceeding was warranted because Judge Holzman had failed to exhaust the administrative remedy available to him pursuant to Judiciary Law §44(7).*
Further, said the court, Judge Holzman “has not demonstrated that doing so would be futile or that irreparable harm would occur absent judicial intervention,” commenting that the "possibility of reputational harm" claimed by Judge Holzman “does not constitute irreparable injury warranting the relief sought by him.”
* The history to date of these proceedings is posted on the Internet at:
The decision is posted on the Internet at: