AZ Probate Judge Pro Tem Lindsay Ellis Has Judicial Immunity

Nobody can question retired Commissioner Lindsay Ellis about her decision to give select attorneys a sneak peek at her plan to approve the draining of an elderly widow’s life savings.

Superior Court Judge Robert Budoff has ruled that Ellis can’t be hauled into court and asked why she decided to send an advance copy of her decision only to the people who stood to benefit from her ruling. Can’t be asked just how cozy her relationship was with one side, the side that wound up with most of Marie Long’s money. Can’t be asked, well, anything.

She has “absolute immunity”

“Not only Judge Pro Tem Ellis, but also her judicial assistant, court clerk and other staff are protected from compelled testimony relative to any communications that may have occurred with any counsel in these proceedings, ex-parte or otherwise,” he wrote, in a ruling made public this week.

But Budoff noted that evidence can be obtained elsewhere and he rejected Ellis’ request that he call off his inquiry into her actions.

Ellis’ neutrality has long been questioned in the case of the 88-year-old widow who went from having $1.3 million to nothing after suffering a stroke and coming under the protection of probate court. Probate’s presiding judge at the time, Karen O’Connor, twice rejected requests last fall to remove Ellis from Marie’s case, claiming there was no evidence of bias.

Then came the remarkable revelation that Ellis, through a judicial assistant, in March sent select attorneys an advance copy of her ruling that they and their clients were justified in collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees from Marie’s trust. Ellis’ ruling also lambasted attorneys for Marie and her sisters, blaming their “hateful and unsubstantiated attacks” for the run-up in fees.

Full Article and Source:
Probate Judge Can’t Be Questioned

8 Responses to “AZ Probate Judge Pro Tem Lindsay Ellis Has Judicial Immunity”

  1. Joe Says:

    >Nobody can even question her? Now what's wrong with that? EVERYTHING!

  2. Barbara Says:

    >If she did nothing wrong, then she should welcome an investigation instead of hiding behind judicial immunity.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    >So, judges are above the law then?

  4. Finny Says:

    >Judicial immunity is a farce.If you hire a plumber to fix a gas leak and the house blows up, is the plumber immune because he made an error of terriffic consequence?No.Judges are no better.

  5. Cam Says:

    >Judicial immunity doesn't apply if a judge breaks the law and engages in criminal acts.But, that's hard to prove because when bad judges do criminal things, they do them in concert with bad lawyers. And then when the heat comes, the judge sells out the lawyers.

  6. Anonymous Says:

    >Judges are not immune from prosecution if they are guilty of criminal acts.

  7. Anonymous Says:

    >No Judge should be able to hide behind Judicial immunity. This is one more road block to stop justice. The scales of justice are hiding somewhere in a closet …..

  8. timlahrman Says:

    >Judicial immunity is unconstitutional.From the AZ state constitution, Article II 2. Political power; purpose of governmentSection 2. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive theirjust powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintainindividual rights.4. Due process of lawSection 4. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due processof law.5. Right of petition and of assemblySection 5. The right of petition, and of the people peaceably to assemble for thecommon good, shall never be abridged.9. Irrevocable grants of privileges, franchises or immunitiesSection 9. No law granting irrevocably any privilege, franchise, or immunity shall beenacted.11. Administration of justiceSection 11. Justice in all cases shall be administered openly, and without unnecessary delay.13. Equal privileges and immunitiesSection 13. No law shall be enacted granting to any citizen, class of citizens, orcorporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms,shall not equally belong to all citizens or corporations31. Damages for death or personal injuriesSection 31. No law shall be enacted in this state limiting the amount of damages to berecovered for causing the death or injury of any person.32. Constitutional provisions mandatorySection 32. The provisions of this Constitution are mandatory, unless by express wordsthey are declared to be otherwise

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: