Judge Gary Byers: champion for powers of the court or a bully?
It’s hard to see how Judge Gary Byers can justify not recusing himself when you read, 2 officials may face jail in dispute with judge :
The judge issued the order Friday to appear in court. It arose out of apparent frustration that his administrative order of Nov. 6 to give Ryan Wolaver, an assistant probation officer, credit for his previous employment in calculating vacation time had not been implemented.
At Monday’s hearing, Judge Byers said he operates independently under state law from the city government; therefore, his order must be carried out by city administrators.
“There is no judgment as to whether or not this is appropriate. They are to perform administrative functions on behalf of the court relative to court employees,” Judge Byers said.Kevin Greenfield, a privately hired lawyer for Mr. Jezak and Ms. Wilker, told the judge that his contempt of court order was directed at the wrong people and didn’t give them enough time to defend themselves.
Mr. Greenfield said the November order from the judge was not sent to either Ms. Wilker or Mr. Jezak, and in any case neither is responsible for deciding vacation eligibility. “They are not the parties that can make these independent judgments on their own,” Mr. Greenfield said.
In continuing the case until March 4, the judge said that if he determines that Mr. Jezak and Ms. Wilker were not the right targets for his order, the show-cause order would be amended.
City Law Director Sheila McAdams asked for the case to be dismissed, saying city employees were correctly following city policy, which prohibits employees hired after Dec. 22, 1997, from getting credit for previous years of experience in setting vacation time.
Threatening to jail both Administrator John Jezak and Assistant Finance Director Linda Wilker for this seems a bit excessive, especially when you read quotes from Judge Byers in the community:
Cases aren’t always black and white, and it’s up to Byers to hear the details and make a judgment call.
“Sending someone to jail is never easy. When it gets easy, it’s time to find a new job,” he said.
Judge Byers is also the judge who made headlines for the stiff penalty he imposed on two deer poachers, on this article someone stating to be Daniel W. Mahoney states that the Judge approved a plea deal in December that included no jail time, then changed his mind.
So what will happen next? Will someone else go to jail if Ryan Wolaver doesn’t get the vacation pay that’s against City policy? Will other city employees who were refused vacation time under this policy go before Judge Byers to ask for equal treatment? What type of relationship will exist between many in the Maumee Administration and Court after this one? Especially given this statement:
“I never received a single phone call or e-mail [from the judge],” said Mr. Jezak, who noted that they work in the same building. “It’s absolutely ridiculous and outrageous. I think it’s intimidation and bullying.”
It goes to show that while here in Toledo there have been some tense moments between City Council/City Administration and the Toledo Municipal Court, at least no one has been threatened with jail…
I am wondering when Judge Byers is up for re-election? Could he be posturing just to create headlines which of course translates into free publicity?
Just a thought.
February 24th, 2009 at 10:05 amJudge Byers is up for re-election in 2009, I suppose that’s possible but given the memory of most voters the timing of this would probably have little help/harm.
Something like this has the potential of backfiring, depending on how the community views the Maumee administrators.
February 24th, 2009 at 10:11 amWAY WAY over the top!!! JAIL TIME , for administrators doing their JOB ??!! It is time for Maumee residents to put an end to this outragious display of complete ARROGENCE , at the next election !!! Then, Byers will be put up by the Toledo Blade and unions, as worthy of a federal justice post ??!! Clabber for brains always makes citizens… nauseous !!
February 24th, 2009 at 11:10 amThe is an abuse of office, if the above facts are true. And would surely prevent re-election.
He says: “There is no judgment as to whether or not this is appropriate. ”
Well hellooooo! Meet the final voice of judgment pal.
You work for us. And at our discretion. Funny how many judges are egocentric creatures. You think that they seek the bench because of this personality deficiency or the bench creates it?
February 24th, 2009 at 12:15 pmThe Judge hasn’t exceeded his authority and I see no reason for him to recuse himself. Government employees like Jezak and Wilker are always denying responsibility when it suits them. Think about it; How many times have you made a reasonable request to a government employee only to encounter obstruction, denial of responsibility and passive aggression?
Let Mr. Jezak and Ms. Wilker sit in jail for a while and see if that doesn’t make them a little more cooperative in the future.
February 24th, 2009 at 4:38 pmInteresting Mad Jack, considering even the City Law Director stated:
Would that mean you’d suggest Judge Byers included McAdams in the jail threat?
February 24th, 2009 at 4:41 pmInteresting how, LisaRenee? Would you suggest that all judges decide their cases by feelings rather than law?
February 24th, 2009 at 5:00 pmInteresting that you don’t believe the Law Director or the reporting that states neither Administrator was responsible for the decision since they did not create/approve the policy that forbade it. That you’d suggest they should go to jail and that the Judge should be the sole determination of what is appropriate when it’s clear there is a conflict as to the two positions. That typically creates a scenario where a judge will recuse him/herself.
February 24th, 2009 at 5:05 pmJudge Kuhlman and I had a discussion about the authority of judges as it relates to budgetary matters. BTW, Tim Kuhlman is anything BUT an egomaniac.
He was pretty emphatic about the fact that the courts and their employees are exclusive of the rest of municipal government and judges set policy and budget.
February 24th, 2009 at 5:20 pmWhich would mean if it is true, then any court employee in Maumee could go back and have that policy or any policy set by the City of Maumee undone.
It sounds as if it’s an issue that would need to be taken up with the legislative branch of government, since they are the ones that typically approve policy decisions and could exempt or clarify court employees as being exempted.
It’s a bit heavy handed to threaten to jail people that had nothing to do with the policy being created/enforced.
February 24th, 2009 at 5:26 pmIt isn’t heavy handed. It’s business as usual and completely justified.
Jezak and Wilker decided that they didn’t like the judge’s ruling and so scoffed at it. Let me reiterate: Let Mr. Jezak and Ms. Wilker sit in jail for a while and see if that doesn’t make them a little more cooperative in the future.
February 24th, 2009 at 6:18 pmMad Jack` wrote:
February 26th, 2009 at 7:23 pmMad Jack` wrote:
February 26th, 2009 at 7:23 pm