Opinion ID: 1124510
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Count 1: Loans from employees

Text: The Commission concluded that appellant's practice of borrowing money from court employees violated NCJC Canon 4(D)(1)(a) and constituted grounds for discipline under ARJD 11(3). On appeal, appellant contends that it was common practice within the North Las Vegas Municipal Court to loan money to coworkers, and that his conduct was not a violation of NCJC Canon 4(D)(1)(a) [13] because none of the employees testified that appellant exploited his position to obtain loans. Appellant also argues that the allegations are not grounds for discipline under ARJD 11(3) because his conduct was not in the performance of judicial or administrative duties. The Commission contends that the evidence clearly and convincingly demonstrates that appellant was exploiting his position by requesting employees to loan him money. The Commission specifically points to Marilyn Bell's testimony that appellant was late in repaying a loan from her and that, after her husband threatened to involve the media, appellant repaid the loan with 2,500 one-dollar bills. We conclude that the evidence presented gives the Commission a substantial basis to find by clear and convincing evidence that Canon 4 D(1)(a) was violated by appellant using his position to secure substantial loans for lengthy periods of time without paying interest and refusing to repay the loan when requested.