Court denies Lokuta request on pay, benefits

HARRISBURG – The state Supreme Court has denied former judge Ann Lokuta’s request to reinstate her pay and benefits pending a ruling by the state Court of Judicial Discipline regarding her attempt to be reinstated to the bench.

In its decision issued Tuesday, the Supreme Court also denied Lokuta’s request that it take jurisdiction of her case. Lokuta had alleged the disciplinary court has been biased against her and could not review her case impartially.

The rulings do not provide a final resolution to the case, which remains in the hands of the Court of Judicial Discipline. That court last week heard testimony from Lokuta and is now debating whether to modify, uphold or vacate its December 2008 decision to remove her from office.

“They basically said we’ve got to wait,” Lokuta’s attorney, Ronald Santora, said of the Supreme Court ruling. “They’ve already remanded the case to the Court of Judicial Discipline to issue a ruling. We’ll wait and see what they do. If we don’t like it, we can come back later.”

The disciplinary court voted in December 2008 to remove Lokuta from office based on testimony at a 2008 misconduct trial that painted her as a judicial bully who abused courthouse staff and attorneys. The court also found she violated judicial canons by utilizing court staff to perform personal errands for her on court time.

In March the state Supreme Court directed the disciplinary court to consider reopening her case based on evidence that came to light following the arrests of former judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan on corruption charges. The ex-jurists are charged with improperly accepting millions of dollars related to rulings they issued involving the PA and Western PA Child Care juvenile detention facilities.

Lokuta’s primary defense has been that Conahan and Ciavarella orchestrated a widespread conspiracy, which included pressuring people to lie about her at her misconduct trial, in order to oust her from office because she reported wrongdoing within the courthouse.

Lokuta has filed numerous court motions seeking to overturn the disciplinary court’s decision. The court held another hearing on the matter on Nov. 17 at which Lokuta offered to accept monitoring of her conduct if the court would reinstate her. The panel said it would issue a written decision, but did not indicate when that would be filed.

Lokuta had previously sought to wrest control of the decision regarding her fate from the disciplinary court.

In a petition filed in August with the Supreme Court, she argued that the attorney who presided over the case, Richard Sprague, should have recused himself because he had represented attorney Robert Powell in matters relating to PA Child Care. Sprague’s relationship with Powell, who also pleaded guilty to charges related to the judicial corruption scandal, created an appearance of impropriety, she argued.

Santora said Tuesday his concerns regarding the disciplinary court’s impartiality have waned somewhat since last week’s hearing before the court.

“We’ve never been optimistic in front of the Court of Judicial Discipline, but last week I thought the judges seemed very concerned about everything that has happened in Luzerne County and the impact those events may have had on (Lokuta’s) proceeding,” Santora said. “They certainly gave us a fair day in court last week and we look forward to their decision.”