Photo by File photo

Judge Kent Florom’s bid to submit new evidence in his defense to the Nebraska Supreme Court has been denied.

FREE Mobile Banking NOW AVAILABLE!

Florom sought to submit 19 character letters written by attorneys, retired judges, professionals, and family members. He also asked for a hearing where six judges (including Lincoln County’s John Murphy, Donald Rowlands, and Kent Turnbull) could testify on his character and contributions, as well as offer their opinions on the matter.

Justice John F. Wright signed the order Jan. 27 denying Florom’s request. Wright is acting as Chief Justice in this matter, as regular Chief Justice Michael Heavican serves as the chairman on the Commission on Judicial Qualifications.

Heavican signed the recommendation for Florom’s removal from the bench and will not participate in the Supreme Court’s final decision.

To that end, Judge John F. Irwin of the Nebraska Court of Appeals was appointed Jan. 19 as a Supreme Court Justice for the Florom case.

Also denied Jan. 27 was a motion to take judicial notice filed on behalf of the Commission for Judicial Qualifications by Anne Winner, a private attorney.

The matter has been scheduled for oral arguments before the Supreme Court in April. No exact date has yet been determined.

Winner will represent the Commission. Florom will be represented by Lincoln attorney Susan Kirchman.

Winner filed a brief Jan. 25 arguing that Florom’s interference in Sharon Kramer’s case, the case of a juvenile member of the Sensations softball team, writing letters on Kramer’s behalf, and threatening attorney Jim Paloucek and his partners rises to the level of “conduct prejudicial.”

Winner’s brief asked that an order for removal be handed down.

That brief was in response to one filed on Florom’s behalf Jan. 4 arguing that a suspension was a more appropriate punishment for his actions.

The Nebraska Committee for Judicial Qualifications filed its recommendation Nov. 5 that Lincoln County Judge Kent Florom be removed from the bench.

That recommendation genuinely surprised some around the Lincoln County courthouse.

“It is a difficult recommendation for a lot of people who appear in front of him regularly to accept or understand,” said North Platte attorney Robert Lindemeier.

It also cast a pall of uncertainty over the future of Lincoln County and a man who has served its citizens as a judge for 18 years.

The committee’s findings came a little over ten months after a complaint was filed against Florom, alleging that, among other things, he had used his judicial authority to interfere in the case of Sharon Kramer.

Letters on Florom's behalf

Included in the documents filed by Judge Kent Florom in the Nebraska Supreme Court was a motion for a hearing to present new evidence.

Included with the motion was a collection of 19 letters from retired judges, attorneys, friends, and family members. Almost all of the letters praised Florom for his long-standing service in Lincoln County and stated that the behavior that landed Florom in trouble was an isolated incident and out of character for him.

Many of the letters acknowledged that Florom’s actions were wrong and discipline was in order, but expressed the belief that removal from the bench was too extreme a punishment. Some of the letters argued that taking Florom off the bench would cause more damage to Lincoln County than leaving him on would cause.

North Platte City Attorney Doug Stack wrote, “Judge Florom has performed a great service to the citizens of the Eleventh Judicial District over the past 17 years.” Stack acknowledged that the comments attributed to Florom were ill-advised but said, “I know Judge Florom to be a very good person and an excellent judge, and one that I would very much hate to see leave the bench.”

Retired Lincoln County Judge Ron Ruff said he considered both Florom and chief complainant Jim Paloucek personal friends. He expressed his belief that Florom’s taking on of coaching responsibilities for the Sensations softball program added “exponentially” to the already high level of stress that comes inherent with being a small community judge.

Ruff said, “Until you have been a judge in a small community and felt the isolation and stress of the job, you can not appreciate how difficult this job can be.” Ruff said that he retired from the bench after four years because of said stress and an irregular heartbeat that he attributed to the strain of being a judge.

Ruff continued, “I found out over the years of practicing law that occasionally circumstances of a certain situation dictate that mercy and understanding are warranted. This is one such situation.”

Nebraska’s United States Attorney Deborah Gilg wrote in what she called an unsolicited letter that, “Kent is certainly deeply remorseful of his conduct and, if allowed to continue to serve as a judge, I am confident that he will learn from this experience and strive to be an even better judge and member of the legal community.”

Robert Lindemeier, who went on record in support of Florom after the recommendation for removal came down, wrote that the media has enjoyed a “field day” with this story to Florom’s detriment and effusively praised Florom as a good man and a good judge.

Lindemeier asked the Supreme Court not to remove Florom from the bench and said, “We need him in Lincoln County for his wisdom and leadership from the bench. This was totally out of character for him. He has served us well here.”

Lindemeier said that many attorneys around North Platte had approached him and asked what they could do to help judge Florom. He also said that all the attorneys he had talked to, including Lincoln County Attorney Rebecca Harling, believed that while disciplinary measures are called for, removal was too harsh a penalty.

Attorney Pat Hays wrote, “As I am sure the Court is aware, it is not easy to find good judges and replacing any judge creates apprehension, particularly among the practicing bar. The replacement could easily be worse than the one being replaced.”

Hays continued, “I personally believe that finding someone of equal or higher ability to replace Judge Florom would be difficult.”

Monica Kramer, a licensed mental health practitioner, wrote in support of Florom both personally and in her professional capacity.

She related her experiences working with youths who wound up in Florom’s court. She said Florom has “consistently, and seemingly without prejudice, conducted himself in an impartial manner.”

Kramer also referred to an incident involving her son, who in 2007 was arrested for drunken driving.

While Kramer’s son was in high school, Florom and his family had grown close with him. They supported him in his athletic and scholastic pursuits, and volunteered to be his “prayer family” his senior year.

When Kramer’s son was arrested for drunken driving, he called the Floroms. Kramer said this was done out of respect, so they Florom family wouldn’t learn of the incident through a third party.

Kramer said Florom acted professionally, advising her son to get an attorney. Kramer said Florom immediately recused himself from any involvement in the case.

Kramer wrote, “This information is noteworthy in order to demonstrate Judge Florom has on other occasions been very involved with young people and has chosen to recuse himself from the judicial process.”

Florom’s wife and father-in-law wrote letters on the judge’s behalf, as did Deputy County Attorney Todd Engleman, attorneys Katherine Hall, Tim Brouillette, Richard Birch, Allen Fugate, Leonard Vyhnalek, Jon S.Schroeder, Amanda Speichert, Nancy Peetz, Cindi Walz, and retired County Judge B. Bert Leffler.

The motion also asked that several sitting and retired judges be allowed to testify before the court concerning their opinions on the matter and Florom’s contributions to the state of Nebraska and Lincoln County. Included amongst the judges listed were Lincoln County District Court Judges John Murphy and Donald Rowlands and County Judge Kent Turnbull.

Turnbull could testify to Florom’s state of mind before and after his threatening call to attorney Jim Paloucek.

The commission and its findings

The Commission for Judicial Qualifications is made up of ten members. The chair is Chief Justice of the Nebraska Supreme Court Michael Heavican.

The rest of the committee is comprised of three judges appointed by the Supreme Court, three attorneys appointed by the state bar association, and three citizens appointed by the governor. The names of the members are listed on the Supreme Court’s website.

The Commission for Judicial Qualifications filed its findings and recommendations Nov. 5. The 20-page document is based on analysis of testimony from a June hearing in Lincoln, recommendations from retired Judge Robert Burkhart (who was appointed Special Master over the June hearing by the Supreme Court), and further arguments submitted by special counsel after Burkhart submitted his findings.

Florom was accused of violating Canons one through four of the Nebraska Code of Judicial Conduct:

• Canon one: Upholding the integrity and independence of the judiciary.

• Canon two: Avoiding impropriety or the appearance of impropriety.

• Canon three: Performing the duties of a judicial office impartially and diligently.

• Canon four: Conducting extra-judicial activities so as to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial obligations.

The document stated that the initial complaint against Florom alleged four separate instances of inappropriate conduct.

The first instance involved Florom’s interference with the case of Sharon Kramer, a former teacher and head coach of the 18-and-under Sensations softball team.

Kramer was convicted of stealing money from a school concession stand. Florom recused himself from her case because his daughter played on the Sensations and he was Kramer’s assistant coach.

However, Florom spoke with Kramer’s defense attorney, Russ Jones, and County Attorney Rebecca Harling about the possibility of Kramer paying restitution without being charged, and when that didn’t work, about allowing Kramer to plead guilty by waiver to spare her attention from the media.

The second instance noted in the complaint was a threatening statement Florom made to Jones with the intent that he deliver it to his fellow attorney and close friend Jim Paloucek.

Paloucek serves on the school board and Florom worried that he might take official action against Kramer following her conviction.

He allegedly said to Jones, “Tell your buddy (Paloucek) if he comes after Sharon Kramer he’s going to be making an enemy he doesn’t want to make.”

When Paloucek and his firm partners Royce Norman and Steve Herman called Florom to confirm his statement, Florom did not back down.

Paloucek said Florom was “matter-of-fact” when he confirmed that Paloucek would be “making a mistake”, taking any action against Kramer and stated “favors extended in the past would not be extended in the future.”

Florom also suggested that the lawyers ask him to recuse himself from their cases in the future.

The third instance cited in the complaint alleged that Florom wrote two letters of recommendation on behalf of Kramer in her teaching license revocation proceeding, the first using official stationery. Florom wrote the second on his personal stationery. Both letters detail Florom’s duties and responsibilities as a judge.

The final instance in the complaint stemmed from Florom’s alleged interference in the case of a juvenile who was the shortstop for the Sensations. Florom communicated ex-parte with both Harling and the girl’s Department of Health and Human Services caseworker concerning the case.

The commission’s findings and recommendations document stated that Burkhart found in August that Florom was in violation of Canons one, two, and four. He did not, however, believe that Canon three had been violated. Special Prosecutor Ann Winter, a Lincoln Attorney, objected to Burkhart’s report, and after arguments the matter was submitted to the commission on September 25.

They disagreed with Burkhart’s findings, and wrote, “There is clear and convincing evidence of violations of Canons one, two, three, and four.

In regard to Florom’s interference in Kramer’s criminal case, the commission wrote, “Regardless of motivation, the interest Florom was serving in his contacts with Harling was personal. Florom’s ongoing interest in the Kramer matter was evident, clearly creating the impression that he, as a county judge, wanted this matter to be handled quietly or simply ‘go away.’”

The document did note the committee’s assertion that Florom never contacted his fellow County Judge Kent Turnbull about Kramer’s sentencing, either before or after the hearing.

In regard to the threat Florom instructed Jones to deliver to Paloucek, the commission found that, “Florom contends that he was mad at Paloucek and that the conversation and his threat were the result of his anger. The record belies this excuse.” The document cited Paloucek’s assertion that Florom was professional, direct, and disciplined in the course of the conversation.

It also said that all member’s of Paloucek’s law firm felt the need to have Florom recuse himself from their cases after the threat was made. It read, “Recusal was not a ‘cure’ as envisioned by Florom. The commission finds this direct violation of Canon three reflected a lack of understanding by Florom of the role and authority of a judge in dealing with lawyers who have occasion to appear before him.”

Florom’s letter of recommendation for Kramer represented a clear violation of Canon two, particularly the first letter he wrote using official stationery.

The second letter, written on his personal stationery, was “not as blatant” as the first letter but still constituted a Canon violation.

Referring to Florom’s interference in the juvenile case, the document stated, “The Special Master found that the conversations between Florom and (the caseworker) were’ not the most prudent… but did not rise to a violation of Canon one.’ We disagree.”

The commission said that Florom’s continued conversations with Harling and the caseworker constituted clear violations of both Canons one and two.

The findings said, “For Florom to view a conversation with a caseworker, held privately in chambers, as one in which the judge is speaking as a softball coach and not a jurist was, at best, a naïve misunderstanding of both the role and the influence of a judge within the justice system.”

“At worst,” it continued, “it was an attempt to bring about a desired outcome through the individual having the most influence on the ultimate disposition of a juvenile matter, the assigned caseworker.”

In its conclusion, the commission unanimously determined, “We are mindful that there have been no prior disciplinary matters involving Florom. However, because of the particularly egregious violations involving the threat to members of the local bar and Florom’s attempts to influence the resolution of both a pending juvenile matter and the Kramer criminal case, the commission recommends that Florom be removed from his judicial office.”