TOPEKA—Reno County District Court Judge Joseph L. McCarville III has been appointed to sit with the Supreme Court Wednesday, December 10, to hear oral arguments in a proceeding relating to judicial conduct.
After hearing oral arguments, McCarville will join Supreme Court justices in their deliberations and opinion drafting.
“I’m glad that Judge McCarville is willing to take time from his duties in Reno County to come to Topeka to sit with the Supreme Court,” said Chief Justice Lawton R. Nuss.
McCarville, who has been a district court judge since 2007, said he is thankful for the chance to sit with the state’s highest court.
“I am honored that I was asked to sit with the Supreme Court,” McCarville said. “I consider it an opportunity to broaden my experience to help me be a better district court judge.”
Before he was a district court judge, McCarville served as a district magistrate judge. Before that, he was in a private law practice for 22 years, was Reno County attorney, assistant Reno County attorney and assistant Shawnee County district attorney. He graduated from Washburn University School of Law.
All Supreme Court oral arguments are webcast live through the Watch Supreme Court Live! link in the right-hand column of the Kansas Judicial Branch website at www.kscourts.org.
The case McCarville will hear is scheduled at 9 a.m. Wednesday, December 10:
No. 112,056: In re Timothy H. Henderson, District Court Judge, 18th Judicial District
Original Proceeding Related to Judicial Conduct: (Public Censure) On March 21, 2014, Panel A of the Commission on Judicial Qualifications issued a Notice of Formal Proceedings against Timothy H. Henderson, District Judge of the 18th District. The Notice of Formal Proceedings alleged that Judge Henderson did engage in certain conduct which violated Rules 1.2 and 1.3 of Canon 1 (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 733-735) and Rules 2.2, 2.3, and 2.9 of Canon 2 (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 735-740). Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation issued July 9, 2014, establish by clear and convincing evidence facts that include that Henderson engaged in harassment by repeatedly making inappropriate and offensive comments in the presence of female staff employed by the Sedgwick County District Attorney's Office, which resulted in a hostile working environment and gender bias; that he sent an email from his personal email account to employees of the Department for Children and Families that exhibited a negative stereotype and/or hostility or aversion toward an attorney and the attorney's beliefs that conveyed the appearance of bias and prejudice; that he engaged in ex parte communication; and that he approached a board member of the Wichita Board of Education and requested that she investigate the reason why his wife was not offered a teaching contract, if appropriate records had been kept, and if there was any foul play involved. Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and based on the unanimous vote of panel members, the panel recommended to the Supreme Court that Henderson be disciplined by public censure. Henderson did not take exceptions and further noted that he does not request the right to address the Supreme Court regarding the disposition of this case unless counsel for the Commission of Judicial Qualifications is granted authority to address the court.