TRENTON — The state Supreme Court today censured former Superior Court Judge Steven Perskie, a big name in New Jersey’s political and legal worlds for four decades, for his handling of a case involving an acquaintance. In rendering its decision, the 5-0 court declared — as Perskie had already acknowledged — that he used poor judgment in a case...
Retired Superior court judge and former state legislator Steven Perskie was disciplined in March for not recusing himself in timely fashion from a case involving his former campaign treasurer. The state Supreme Court has upheld Perskie's censure.TRENTON — The state Supreme Court today censured former Superior Court Judge Steven Perskie, a big name in New Jersey’s political and legal worlds for four decades, for his handling of a case involving an acquaintance.
In rendering its decision, the 5-0 court declared — as Perskie had already acknowledged — that he used poor judgment in a case argued toward the end of his 15-year career on the bench.
But the court dismissed the most damaging charge Perskie considered a smear on his reputation: that he lied to the influential Senate Judiciary committee, a panel he once chaired. In a statement released through his attorney, Perskie, said he accepts the censure but is "extremely gratified" the court dismissed the other charge.
"This was an attack on his integrity as opposed to an attack on his judgment," said his attorney Frank Corrado of Wildwood. "He takes his integrity very seriously."
Best known as the architect of New Jersey’s gambling laws, Perskie, 66, has had key roles in all three branches of government. He was a lawmaker in both the Assembly and the Senate, and served as a Superior Court judge for seven years before stepping down to work on Jim Florio’s successful 1989 gubernatorial campaign. He was as chief of staff under Florio, spent four years heading the Casino Control Commission and was reappointed to bench in 2001.
The court censured Perskie, who sat in Atlantic County, for not recusing himself from a 2006 case involving an acquaintance and for going into the courtroom after he pulled out of the case.
His handling of that civil trial involving his longtime acquaintance, Frank Siracusa, his former business associate and campaign treasurer, came under scrutiny during his 2008 renomination hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
After being asked several times by one of the attorneys to recuse himself from the case, Perskie eventually complied, but he informed the Senate committee he did so because he had "blown up" at the attorney, Steven Fram, not because of his relationship with Siracusa.
After the trial was transferred to another judge, Perskie sat in the courtroom twice during the trial and talked to Fram’s adversary. Fram’s client, Alan Rosefielde, filed a complaint with the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct. The ACJC in March recommended censure for not recusing himself, the courtroom appearance and his "inconsistent" statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Perskie acknowledged he should have recused himself sooner and he should not have watched the trial, but said he did not deliberately mislead the judiciary committee.
The court called the charge about Perskie’s conduct before the Senate Judiciary Committee a "grave allegation" but said the judiciary’s ethics panel did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that Perskie deliberately misled the panel. It noted deciding this was "exceedingly difficult" because Perskie was "extremely lax" in his preparation for the hearing.
Because Perskie retired from the bench last year, the censure was the harshest act the Supreme Court could take against him.
Related coverage:
• N.J. Supreme Court committee recommends censure for retired Superior Court Judge Perskie