Court Opinion

ID: 9691892
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 15:22:43.26702+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:27.581182
License: Public Domain

HAMITER, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
While I do not and cannot approve or condone the alleged illegal and, perhaps, immoral conduct of Judge Haggerty, I do not find that it has interfered in any manner with his handling of the dockets and cases in Section “C” of ■ the Criminal District Court of the Parish of Orleans over which he presides. It pertained only to his private life; not to his official duties, as is reprobated by Article IX, Section 4 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1921. This constitutional provision, insofar as pertinent here, states: “Grounds for removal or involuntary retirement. A justice or judge may be removed from office or retired involuntarily for wilful miscondiict relating to his official duty or wilful and persistent failure to perform his duty, * * *.”
(Italics mine.)
Numerous witnesses, all prominent business and professional persons, testified favorably in behalf of the respondent judge before the Judiciary Commission (it recommended the removal of Judge Haggerty). Among those, as well as some of their testimony, were as follows:
Mr. Severn T. Darden, former District Attorney of Orleans Parish:
“Q. Do you know other people in the community who know Judge Plaggerty also?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Amongst those people what is his general reputation for being an industrious and fair-minded judge?
A. I would say it’s excellent. Certainly on the basis of my observations it’s been very excellent. * * * ”
*43Mr. John E. Jackson, Attorney:
“Q. Have you ever heard Judge Haggerty’s reputation as being a fair-minded and industrious judge discussed, Mr. Jackson?
A. I haven’t heard it discussed controversially. I’ve heard it observed that he was a fair-minded and honest judge. * * * * * *
Q. Have you ever heard his reputation for promptness and attendance in his Court discussed ?
'A. I’ve never practiced in the criminal courts in New Orleans, and I have never heard any adverse criticisms of the Judge’s conduct of his Court, any absence of decorum in his Court, any situation of the lack of attention to the business of the Court.”
Mr. John E. Morrill, Retired:
“Q. Mr. Morrill, what is your present business or occupation?
A. I was Head of the Sewerage and Water Board, but I retired the other day.
Q. I see, and for how long had you been Head of the Sewerage and Water Board?
A. Oh 20 years.
Q. Mr. Morrill, do you know Judge Edward A. Haggerty, Jr.?
A. Yes, I know the Judge and his family for years and years.
Q. Do you know other people in this community who know the Judge?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Amongst those people who know him what is his general reputation for being a fair-minded and industrious judge?
A. I have always considered him a fair-minded and industrious judge.
Q. And do other people consider him that?
A. He has that reputation in my learning.”
Mr. Clem H. Sehrt, Attorney:
“Q. Mr. Sehrt, of course, you’re an attorney. How long have you been an attorney?
A. Well I’ve been active practitioner since 1932.
Q. Do you know Judge Edward A. Haggerty, Jr.?
A. I know Judge Edward A. Haggerty intimately since the first year prior to his coming out of Law School.
Q. Do you know lot of people in the community who know him?
A. Well, I know many, many, many people who know him. I’d like to say more than you’re asking me questions leading up to being a character witness. Am I confined to those questions?
Q. No. I’m going to ask you personal questions, too.
*45A. All right.
Q. So you can feel free to elaborate, but getting to the character question. Amongst those people who know him what is his reputation for being industrious, hard-working, fair-minded judge?
A. Excellent.
Q. Among those people have you ever heard it discussed that he conducts himself in such a manner as to bring disgrace and discredit upon his judicial office and that results in the loss of public respect and confidence in his ability to perform his duties? Has that ever been discussed ?
A. I have never discussed that with any member of the Bar, and no one has ever asked me any such things about Judge Haggerty.
Q. Now what is your personal observation of Judge Haggerty as a judge and as an individual ?
A. Well I think he handled probably the Shaw case, probably the most difficult criminal case that’s been before any court in this state in the last 50 year or 25 years. I think he handled it admirably and I think the entire Bar of the State of Louisiana applauds him for the manner in which he handled it. That’s just one example.
******
Q. Was there anything else you wanted to add?
A. Well I’d like to say this, that through the years during Ed’s period as an Assistant District Attorney I met him many, many times. I’ve been out with him socially. I'm a member of New Orleans Athletic Club. He is, too. I have met him socially in other places, and it would be good to say it, I’ve been to the races with him on occasion, and frankly I think besides having illustrious family background he has upheld it as a man and as' a citizen and as a judge and as an assistant district attorney.
* * * * * *
Q. Viewing obscene movies in the presence of others, men and women and attorneys who practice in his Court?
A. Well I have never gone to events to view obscene movies, but I’d have to tell you that it’s been a known practice in this United States. I’ve never paid to go view them, but I guess if you discredited every man who viewed them we’d have a list so long it would be pitiful, and if this is done in a private situation, if it’s conducted quietly, if this is not a thing that public affairs put on page one. I happened to know that that happened ten years, fifteen years ago in this community. The entire City Council was at Lenfant’s Restaurant, and the showing of nude pictures of women and men, what not, were being shown. The whole Council was there. You’d have to condemn the entire City Council. The Mayor was *47there. He left before the police came and made the arrest. It’s a common practice in America. Now whether it’s good or bad, I don’t know. In Sweden they do it in public.”
Mr. Paul Burke, Postmaster, New Orleans :
“Q. Mr. Burke, what is your present occupation or profession?
A. I’m Postmaster, the City of New Orleans.
******
Q. Were you at one time councilman for the City of New Orleans?
A. Yes, Sir, for eight years.
Q. Do you know Judge Edward A. Haggerty, Jr.?
A. Yes, Sir.
Q. How long have you known him?
A. 25-30 years.
Q. Do you know other people who know him?
A. Yes, Sir.
Q. What is his reputation in the community for being a fair-minded and hardworking judge?
A. I think his reputation is highly esteemed by everyone that knows him well.
Q. Mr. Burke, have you ever heard it discussed that Judge Haggerty’s activities have brought disgrace and discredit to the judicial office and that resulted in a loss of public respect and confidence in his ability to perform his duties?
A. Stated to me, no, Sir.”
Raymond F. Hufft:
“Q. General, would you state your present position or occupation, please.
A. I am regional commissioner of the United States Customs and my region includes Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Tampa, Florida West.'
Q. And how long have you held that position, sir?
A. I have been in that capacity for eight years.
Q. And prior to that what was your occupation ?
A. I am a partner in the insurance company of Drury and Hufft, and prior to that I served eight years as the adjutant general of the State of Louisiana and the director of Selective Service for the State of Louisiana.
Q. General, you know Judge Edward Haggerty, do you not?
Q. How long have you known him?
A. I have known the judge for approximately thirty years.
Q. How well or how intimately have you known him ?
*49A. I am — well, I was his best man when he was married and I am a fraternity brother of his.
Q. ' Do you know other people in this community who know Judge Haggerty?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Among those other people in the community what is the Judge’s general reputation for sobriety?
A. He is known to be a good judge, he—
* * * * * *
Q. I didn’t mean as regards his capacity as a judge, I mean with regard to sobriety, being a sober individual.
A. Well, I see the judge in church on Sunday mornings, before I moved down to Belle Chasse I was his neighbor, I have been in his company socially for. years and years and I would say his character is good, his character is excellent.
Q. Now, with regard to his reputation as being an industrious and sober judge, what would you say his reputation in the • community -is ?
A. Real good.”
Particularly impressive was the testimony Of Honorable Jim Garrison,- the present District Attornéy. of- Orleans Parish who has held that -position for more than eight years and-is and has been unfriendly with Judge Haggerty; He observed:
“Q. I don’t mean to insult you,- but you’ve been somewhat of a controversial District Attorney having problems on occasions with judges. So it would interest me to know your opinion of Judge Haggerty as a judge.
A. First I’d have to say that I think we have a very good Bench out there across the board, but if you would draw a line, put all the judges in vertical order and draw a line say at the median in the middle of the line, you would have to put Judge Haggerty in the upper part because of his experience: I would say that is no reflection on any of the other judges out there to say that he’s definitely one of the better judges.
Q. Has your office had any particular difficulty with the handling of docket in Judge Haggerty’s section, Section ‘C’ ?
A. There’s never been any in eight years.
******
Q. Now Judge Haggerty was the Presiding Judge in the famous trial of the State of Louisiana versus Clay Shaw?
A. Yes.
Q. It would be fair to say it wás á case that you were particularly interested in?
A. Yes.
Q. You paid particular attention to the handling of this case?
A. Yes, I did.
*51Q. What would be your reaction to Judge Haggerty’s handling of that matter?
A. I will repeat. I’ll simply repeat what I have said before on a number of instances that this was the most distinguished work on the part of a District Judge that I have ever seen since I’ve been a lawyer.
Q. Let me ask you this. You’re familiar with the elections in the Parish of Orleans, City of New Orleans, generally?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know whether or not Judge Haggerty’s position comes up for vote by the public in short order?
A. It comes up in 1972.
Q. What is Judge Haggerty’s general reputation insofar as being a fair-minded and industrious judge?
A. His general reputation is that he is both fair-minded and industrious.
* * * * * *
Q. Llave you ever had occasion to hear Judge Llaggerty’s reputation as to whether or not he’s an industrious judge discussed ?
A. Mr. LeCorgne, I have not heard it discussed in a positive way. I’m more conscious of it being taken for granted in the sense that it has never come up. For example, if you were to ask me to cite an instance there, I don’t think I could.
Q. Have you ever had occasion to hear Judge Haggerty’s reputation for absence and tardiness in this Court discussed?
A. I have heard of his being late on two occasions in the last eight years. There may be more. I’m conscious of his being late on two occasions.
Q. How about his absences ?
A. A complete absence?
Q. Yes.
A. I’m not conscious of a complete absence.
Q. On any occasion?
A. No, I’m not.
Q. Well, Mr. Garrison, if I told you that one of your Assistant District Attorneys has testified that from the period of September 11, 1968 through January 9, 1969 Judge Haggerty was late or absent on 21 occasions ?
A. Is this a District Attorney in that section ?
Q. Yes.
A. I would say two things. First certainly that he should know better than I, being in that section, but on the other hand, until this operation I was there evei'yday, and he should have come in and made such complaint, and no such complaint- was made "to me because I would have- talked to the Judge because we have never ' had any trouble com*53municating, and this is the sort of thing that I would feel no hesitancy about going down to his Chambers and discussing, but no such complaint was ever made to me.
* * * * * *
Q. If I tell you that another assistant district attorne/ testified for the period August 4th, 1969 through December 11th, 1969 Court was not held in Section ‘C’ of the Criminal District Court by Judge Haggerty on 17 occasions, would you say that this, coupled with the other absences and tardiness which I mentioned, indicates an industrious judge to you?
A. I cannot answer yes or no. I will answer it this way, and if it’s not satisfactory, I will try and give you more. As you knew since I have been District Attorney I have publicly exhibited a concern with regard to productivity of the Courts, and on one occasion it even brought me into conflict with the judges. I have to say with regard to Judge Haggerty I have never had called to my attention any systematic absence or failure to do his job.
>k * 5k * * *
Q. Do you think it’s proper for a judge who publicly bets in a handbook and who observes obscene movies and watches obscene movies in the presence of others at a party is a proper person to sk in judgment on those types of cases?
A. Well of course I don’t, but let me add this I do not know of any judges out there who are making improper decisions in those kinds of cases, and that would be what I would be concerted about as District Attorney.
Q. Mr. Garrison, if I told you that from the period of December 11, 1967 through April 20, 1970 Court was not held * * in Section ‘C’ of Criminal District Court for 108 days, would you say that that indicates an industrious judge?
A. I don’t think you can draw a conclusion, Mr. LeCorgne, by counting the entire number of days of the year because for the simple reason that if you count the Court holidays and if you count the other days of the year which Court is not held it’s surprising how many days you come up with. I can only reply to that that we have not had a problem of productivity with regard to Section ‘C’.
>k ík 5{: 5(?
Q. Mr. Garrison, have you ever heard discussed the fact or the lack of that fact that Judge Haggerty’s behavior has resulted in a loss of public respect and confidence in his ability to do his duty? Have you heard that matter discussed?
A. No. I think I would have to say that the off-duty life and the on-Bench life were capsulated.
Q. That they were capsulated?
*55A. That one never leads into the other.
* * * * * *
Q. Mr. Garrison, do I understand you to state that in the presence of Judge Haggerty you feel that his off-duty life should be separated entirely from his on-duty life ?
A. I’m saying that it has been. In other words, assuming that what I have heard is true that he drinks more than other people off-duty, there has been no evidence of it on the Bench as far as I’m concerned, and there are many people who' can drink at night and still work more productively in the day than other people, and I make that point because ' I’m very conscious of the years of his experience in the Courtroom. For example if I were to ask a Judge in the Criminal District Court a question about ' evidence, although the other judges are experienced, a number of them, I would go first to Judge Haggerty because he is the most knowledgable in evidence on the Bench out there.
Q. Are you in a position to because of having heard discussions of this, are you in a position to state whether as a matter of general reputation in the community the off-duty affairs that you mentioned may have affected his on-duty affairs?
A. I think I would be in such a position, and I will say that I don’t think it will affect his duty.
Q. And you don’t think it has in the general reputation of the community itself?
A. No, I don’t think.
* * * * * *
Q. Mr. Garrison, Judge Haggerty furnished this Commission a Sworn Statement on March 5th, 1970, which has been offered and introduced and filed in evidence as CEO-22 in which he says, and I quote: ‘ * * * It’s common knowledge, not rumor, common knowledge around the Criminal District Court that Mr. Garrison knowingly permitted Mr. Alcoclc and Mr. Alford to file these charges with the hope that he may have another judgeship for his friend Governor McKeithen to fill.’
A. I will reply to that by saying it was with the deepest reluctance that. I took the charges, and ■ I will go - further and say that-it would be a pronounced loss to the Criminal District Court if it were to lose Judge Haggerty because of his experience. That was my position .at that time and it is now.”
The foregoing testimony, I think, completely refutes the primary charge of 1. L (found by the Commission to be proved) which reads: “CHARGE 1. L., IN CONDUCTING YOURSELF IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO BRING DISGRACE AND DISCREDIT UPON THE JUDICIAL OFFICE WHICH YOU HOLD, RESULTING IN A LOSS OF PUBLIC *57RESPECT ■ AND CONFIDENCE IN YOUR ABILITY TO PERFORM YOUR DUTIES.”
Insofar as the charge of Judge Haggerty’s placing bets with the “bookies” (one relied on heavily by the Commission) I must say that such activity is no more illegal than betting at the New Orleans Fair Grounds or other licensed race tracks in the state. In my opinion all are prohibited by Article XIX, Section 8 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1921 which plainly recites: “Gambling is a vice and the Legislature shall pass laws to suppress it.” (See my dissenting opinion in Gandolfo et al. v. Louisiana Racing Commission et al., 227 La. 45, 78 So.2d. 504.) (Italics mine.)
In conclusion, I quote with approval the following from the brief filed in this court by the respondent judge: “In fact with regard to the entire Charge 1 L it should be pointed out that there is not one instance in the record where anyone testified that any conduct of the respondent judge had brought disgrace and discredit upon the office which he holds. To the contrary many of the witnesses who testified on behalf of the respondent judge clearly answered that they had never heard discussed that his conduct had brought disgrace and discredit upon the judicial office- which he holds, or resulted in a loss of public respect and confidence in his ability to perform his duties. More affirmatively many testified that they had held the judge in the highest regard. * * *
“* * * If a judge offered no explanation for this four-month absence, it could well be assumed that the absence constituted a willful and persistent failure to perform his duties. If, on the other hand, the judge can show that two of those months he was recuperating from a heart attack and for the other two months he was hospitalized as a result of an automobile accident, it could hardly be said that his persistent failure to perform his duties was willful failure. Therefore, it would appear clear to the writer that the judiciary commission errs when it finds the respondent judge willfully failed to perform his duties by being absent and late. The fact that the respondent judge has not willfully failed to perform his duties and that he has actually timely and adequately disposed of the cases allotted to his section can be borne out further when one remembers the fact that during the trial of the celebrated Shaw Case, his fellow judges suggested that he be taken out of the allotment, so that he would receive no new cases during the forty days of this trial. This, he refused and despite the fact that the trial lasted forty days and he could handle no other matters, his docket still compares more than favorably with his fellow judges. The writer thinks that this speaks *59eloquently against any allegation that he has failed to perform his duties by either being late or absent on occasion. * * *
“ * * *
“The issue before this Honorable Court is simply; whether or not the personal conduct of Judge Edward A. Haggerty, Jr. is such as to warrant his removal from office. * * * Nowhere in the record is it indicated or even intimated, that any off bench activity of the respondent judge ever affected his behavior on the bench. To the contrary, the record is replete with testimony as to the judge’s ability, competence, industry, and fair-mindedness. Personal behavior that may not fit the norms and standards of one hundred percent of the community cannot, in the writer’s opinion, possibly warrant wiping out a most admirable judicial career that has exceeded 13 years; and a career that has included more than 25 years of public service in a judicial, prosecutive and military career. It is suggested that the respondent judge was first elected in July of 1956. He was reelected in 1960 for a full 12 year term, which would end on December 31st, 1972. His plurality in that election was in excess of 80,000 votes. Having served this many years in the previously mentioned capacities, it would seem that the choice should be left to the people of his district to determine whether he should be retained.
It is now just about two years before the people will be able to make such a decision.”
I respectfully dissent.
Rehearing denied.
HAMITER, C. J., dissents from the refusal of a rehearing, he adhering to his reasons in his previous dissent.