Container Top
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
Search

Events Calendar

EVENT SEARCH:

In This Section


Most Read Stories


Blogs:


Pets:
Zeke, the basketball playing dog

The Heldenfiles:
Friday Notebook

Patrick McManamon:
Dwayne Wade says no to Cleveland

Akron Zips:
Opponent outlook: Kent State

Browns Bulletin:
Quick thought on Browns rookies

Tribe Matters:
Now is no time to quit

Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth test showed marijuana

Kent State Sports:
Men's Basketball Scheduling update

Cleveland Cavaliers:
Andy’s Signed According to ESPN

All Da King's Men:
Baby Got Barack !

Blog of Mass Destruction:
As California Goes?

Akron Law Café:
Why do public officials violate Ohio Ethics Laws?

Varsity Letters:
Report: Ontko selects Wisconsin

See Jane Style:
Oh Baby!

Car Chase:
Where do We Go from Here?

Let's Talk Real Estate:
Closings….Not the Good Kind!

Ohio Travels with Betty:
Margy inquires-when is a Taste of Hudson?

Sound Check:
LeVert II live performance Saturday night — "Dedication" album due July 13,

HRLite House:
DDI One of Best Places to Work

Akron Gamer:
Video game sales drop in May

Ohio Supreme Court tells county judge to pick up the pace

By John Seewer
Associated Press writer

The Ohio Supreme Court scolded a county judge today for taking too much time in ruling on cases before his court, some which languished for up to two years.

It's the first time the court has disciplined a judge for failing to manage cases in a timely manner.

The state's high court reviewed the work of Sandusky County Judge Harry Sargeant Jr. and said it found unnecessary delays in cases that included child-support and divorce disputes.

Ohio Chief Justice Thomas Moyer said unjustified delays diminish confidence in the legal system and had a profound impact on those involved, including children.

Sargeant left many people ''in a legal limbo, often for a period of years,'' Moyer wrote in the court's 6-1 opinion.

All courts in Ohio have rules that set guidelines on how long cases should take to be resolved.

Sargeant, who has been a judge in Sandusky County since 1979, often kept cases pending for longer than the time guidelines, according to the court, which reviewed the judge's cases from 1998 through 2007.

Sargeant's attorney, Charles Kettlewell, said today that the delays were caused by a need for more staff and miscommunications between the court and attorneys who had cases before the judge.

The court said Sargeant agreed that he violated provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The court also noted that he cooperated fully in the disciplinary proceedings and has hired a law clerk to help with his caseload.

In one divorce case filed in September 2003, Sargeant conducted a hearing a year later, but he did not make a final decision until August 2006 after an attorney filed a grievance. The woman who filed for divorce and her attorney had twice before asked the judge when a decision would be made, the court said.

Time guidelines for courts say that divorce cases involving children should be resolved within 18 months while divorces without children should be taken care of within a year.

AP-CS-05-20-08 1537EDT

The Ohio Supreme Court scolded a county judge today for taking too much time in ruling on cases before his court, some which languished for up to two years.

It's the first time the court has disciplined a judge for failing to manage cases in a timely manner.

The state's high court reviewed the work of Sandusky County Judge Harry Sargeant Jr. and said it found unnecessary delays in cases that included child-support and divorce disputes.

Ohio Chief Justice Thomas Moyer said unjustified delays diminish confidence in the legal system and had a profound impact on those involved, including children.

Sargeant left many people ''in a legal limbo, often for a period of years,'' Moyer wrote in the court's 6-1 opinion.

All courts in Ohio have rules that set guidelines on how long cases should take to be resolved.

Sargeant, who has been a judge in Sandusky County since 1979, often kept cases pending for longer than the time guidelines, according to the court, which reviewed the judge's cases from 1998 through 2007.

Sargeant's attorney, Charles Kettlewell, said today that the delays were caused by a need for more staff and miscommunications between the court and attorneys who had cases before the judge.

The court said Sargeant agreed that he violated provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The court also noted that he cooperated fully in the disciplinary proceedings and has hired a law clerk to help with his caseload.

In one divorce case filed in September 2003, Sargeant conducted a hearing a year later, but he did not make a final decision until August 2006 after an attorney filed a grievance. The woman who filed for divorce and her attorney had twice before asked the judge when a decision would be made, the court said.

Time guidelines for courts say that divorce cases involving children should be resolved within 18 months while divorces without children should be taken care of within a year.

AP-CS-05-20-08 1537EDT



Story tools

Email  Email   Print  Print   Save  Save   Reprint  Reprint   Popular  Most Popular   Reprint  Subscribe

Share this story

AddThis Social Bookmark Button
















Most Commented Stories