CHARLESTON – The state Judicial Hearing Board has denied a request by a disabled family court judge to conduct a hearing against him near his home in the Eastern Panhandle.
Board Presiding Judge Jack Alsop issued an order April 6 denying a motion filed by 23rd District Family Court Judge Glen R. Stotler, who has been paralyzed from the waist down and confined to a wheelchair since 1973. In addition, Stotler has been on medical leave for six months or so because of pressure spots, a condition he says is common with paraplegics.
Stotler and another family court judge have been accused of violating the rules of judicial conduct after Stotler sent a letter to the state Supreme Court and other officials requesting an investigation into the conduct of Judicial Disciplinary Counsel regarding an investigation into the conduct of yet another family court judge.
Stotler
In his April 5 motion about his hearing, Stotler says the problem with the pressure sores has been so bad that he has been unable to attend to the day-to-day duties on the bench.
“While Judge Stotler is hoping for a full recovery, during the last six months, he has been largely confined to his home and not able to move about, even with the use of a wheelchair,” he said in the motion requesting the hearing be moved. “Between his regular doctor’s visits and one surgery, Judge Stotler has had in-home health caregivers, and he has been using a wound vac.”
Stotler, 71, had requested the July 24 hearing to be held in his home of Berkeley Springs in Morgan County or somewhere else in the Eastern Panhandle rather than the Kanawha Circuit Court Judicial Annex courtroom of Judge Joanna Tabit in Charleston.
“Judge Stotler would like to attend his hearing and to be able to participate in it in person,” his motion states. “He is not able, however, to travel the 275 miles from Berkeley Springs to Charleston to do so, and he requests that the hearing be scheduled to be held in Morgan County where he resides.”
Stotler’s response, filed by attorney and state Senator Charles S. Trump IV, notes Rule 4.1 of the West Virginia Rules of Judicial Disciplinary Procedure says the Judicial Hearing Board may conduct hearings at places that will best serve the public interest not inconsistent with the interests of the complainant and the respondent.
“Judge Stotler asserts that the holding of his hearing in Charleston, West Virginia, is ‘inconsistent with his interests as the respondent,’” his motion states. “This, because it will be impossible for him to attend and participate in person if the hearing is to be held in Charleston.”
The motion says precedent exists for the hearing to be held somewhere besides Charleston, noting recent JHB cases have been held elsewhere. The hearing for Family Court Judge Deanna Rock was held in Morgantown, and one for Circuit Judge Carter Williams was held in Martinsburg. He notes that none of the parties in those cases have “a disability requiring an accommodation anything like that which confronts Judge Stotler.”
Stotler severed his spinal cord in November 1973 when he fell from a tree standing while deer hunting. He finished his undergraduate studies at Shepherd College before beginning his career in public service that includes Town Council for the Town of Bath, the Morgan County Board of Education, the Morgan County Commission and family court judge for Morgan, Hampshire and Mineral counties since 2011. He also has served as a member of the Judicial Hearing Board.
The state Judicial Investigation Commission says Stotler and Rock, also a family court judge in the 23rd Circuit, violated the Code of Judicial Conduct after Judicial Disciplinary Counsel Teresa Tarr and Deputy JDC Brian Lanham recommended censure and a fine for Raleigh County Family Court Judge Louise Goldston following an incident when she stopped a court hearing and ordered the parties to meet at the home of a Raleigh County man involved in a post-divorce contempt proceeding.
In March 2021, Stotler sent a letter to then-Supreme Court Chief Justice Evan Jenkins and other officials critical of Tarr and Lanham. In the letter, Stotler said the Supreme Court should fire the prosecutors from the state’s Judicial Disciplinary Counsel for their poor treatment of Goldston. Stotler wrote that Goldston was forced into making agreements during questioning by state officials through intimidation and deception. The state Office of Disciplinary Counsel found those claims to be untrue.
“I believe it is evident that the JDC does not believe they are answerable to anyone for their actions, their conduct or their practices, Stotler wrote in the letter. “I truly hope the Supreme Court takes this matter seriously and directs that an immediate investigation be conducted.
“I believe the conduct of the JDC attorneys is of such nature to warrant their termination or at the least a serious reprimand.”
Stotler later testified under oath to the JIC he drafted a letter alone, but the JIC said it found evidence to show Stotler didn’t draft the letter to Jenkins alone. It said J.R. Campbell, Stotler’s family court coordinator, wrote the first draft of the letter before Stotler and Rock emailed it between themselves making changes.
In May 2021, the West Virginia Family Court Judicial Association drafted a resolution calling for the firing of Tarr and Lanham. Later in May 2021, the investigative panel of the state’s Lawyer Disciplinary Board found no merit to the complaint filed by Stotler.
“The evidence clearly demonstrates that respondent Tarr and respondent Lanham treated the FCJs with respect and professionalism,” the filing, written by Investigative Panel Chairwoman Amy Crossan, states. “It is shocking that a long-standing member of the judiciary bestowed with the honor of being part of the system designed to protect and preserve the integrity of the judicial system would make such baseless accusations designed solely to impugn the integrity of two members of the West Virginia State Bar.
“It does not appear that FCJ Stotler conducted any factual investigation into the allegations regarding JDC before regurgitating the untimely, unsupported allegations made by FJC (Louise) Goldston and sending an ex parte communication, written on his official court letterhead, to the Supreme Court.”
Goldston retired in January, a week after a resolution was introduced asking the House Judiciary Committee to investigate allegations of impeachable offenses against her.
In 2020, Goldston stopped a divorce hearing and told the parties to meet at the home of the man involved in the divorce. Once there, Goldston led a search of the man’s home without a warrant, threatened to have him arrested when he started recording the incident and had a bailiff seize his phone. When the man’s ex-wife claimed items belonged to her, Goldston told her to take the items. The man says Goldston walked barefoot through his house and sat in a rocking chair.
That man, Matthew Gibson, reported Goldston to the JIC, which charged her with violating the state Code of Judicial Conduct.
In March 2021, Gibson filed the federal lawsuit against Goldston as well as the Raleigh County Commission and three sheriff’s deputies related to the incident. That was the same month the Judicial Hearing Board issued its recommended decision to the state Supreme Court regarding Goldston’s actions after she had been charged with violating at least seven rules in the Code of Judicial Conduct after admitting she visited homes of litigants to check on disputed property.
In September 2020, the state Judicial Investigation Commission filed its formal statement of charges with the Supreme Court against Goldston, who says she is entitled to judicial immunity and seeks to have Gibson’s claims dismissed in federal court.
Goldston served as a family court judge since 1994, presiding over cases in Raleigh, Summers and Wyoming counties. She never had been disciplined for judicial misconduct, but she did admit she had a 20-year practice of going to parties’ homes “to either determine if certain disputed marital property was present and/or to supervise the transfer of disputed property.”
After being denied judicial immunity, Goldston appealed her case to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. If her appeal is successful, there will be no trial in the Gibson matter. If it is unsuccessful, the trial to seek monetary damages will continue.
West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals case number 22-0227, Judicial Hearing Board complaint number 50-2021
