Window for suspension shrinks as Stow Judge Kim Hoover awaits decision on his appeal

Nearly a year has passed since the Ohio Supreme Court heard Stow Municipal Court Judge Kim Hoover's appeal of a state investigative panel's decision to penalize him for judicial misconduct.

But even if the court determines the recommended two-year suspension is appropriate, Hoover will not have to carry the full weight of that punishment.

Hoover, who turned 70 this year, is now ineligible to run for a judgeship in Ohio because of his age and must leave the bench when his term concludes at the end of 2025.

Hoover did not respond to requests to be interviewed for this story.

Here's a look at where the case stands and what's ahead.

Why did a conduct board recommend suspending the Stow Municipal Court judge?

The Board of Professional Conduct of the Ohio Supreme Court's recommendation followed an investigation and hearings after a series of complaints filed starting in December 2021 claiming that Hoover was using illegal and coercive tactics to recover court-ordered fees from defendants.

George Jonson, Hoover's attorney, said during the hearings that the people in question in the cases "were not first-timers, but had appeared in court before."

Jonson said the disciplinary board misunderstood Hoover's motivation in collecting the fines, and that the motivation was not just about the money.

"It is about [Hoover's] actions to get the attention of a small group of defendants who failed to appear in court, refused to fulfill their sentences, or otherwise thumbed their noses at the court," Jonson wrote in a March 2023 appeal. "The Board itself concluded: [Hoover] testified that the collection of fines and costs is about more than money; it is about holding defendants accountable and teaching them responsibility."

Jonson wrote that the board "incorrectly concluded that the individual defendants in this case were singled out — or coerced to pay fines and costs — because of their socio-economic status."

The disciplinary officials handling the case described Hoover's actions in recovering court fees as "the equivalent of a modern-day debtor's prison."

"This is biased against people of limited means," said Ohio Disciplinary Counsel Joe Caligiuri during the May 2023 appeal hearing. Caligiuri is responsible for prosecuting formal complaints filed against state judges. "We have no issue with a judge holding people responsible for their conduct. But you cannot extort people under the threat of incarceration to compel payment of fines and costs for which you can never incarcerate people for, and the judge did this routinely."

What happened during Judge Kim Hoover's appeal hearing?

During the May 17 appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, Jonson was first to address the court, saying the disciplinary panel's recommendation for Hoover to be punished for violating judicial rules was inconsistent with the panel's own findings that Hoover did not act with a dishonest or selfish motive.

Justice Patrick DeWine asked Jonson if he was aware of a discrepancy between audiotape of an exchange in Hoover's courtroom and the court reporter's transcription of it — an exchange that was highlighted during the investigation as an example of Hoover racially mocking a defendant. Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy said she, too, noticed the discrepancy. Jonson responded he was embarrassed to say that he was not aware of it.

When it was Caligiuri's turn to speak in support of the recommended punishment, DeWine quickly cut him off and challenged his characterization of Hoover as racist — citing the transcription discrepancy.

Caligiuri replied that Hoover had agreed that the transcript was accurate.

"He agreed that it was racist?" DeWine asked.

"He agreed that that's what he said. He never agreed that it was racist — just like he didn't he agree when he referred to another Black female as 'child' that that wasn't racist. The board found that it was, and I submit to you that it was also — at least racial undertones," Caliguiri said.

He added that the board found Hoover routinely showed bias and said "the record is replete with examples" of the Stow judge's "condescending attitude toward people of limited means."

What happens next?

While the Ohio Supreme Court deliberates whether to enforce disciplinary action, Hoover has remained on the Stow Municipal Court. He is one of the two judges in that court, which hears misdemeanor criminal cases, traffic violations and civil cases involving $15,000 or less.

The Court serves 16 communities in northern Summit County: Boston Heights, Boston Township, Cuyahoga Falls, Hudson, Macedonia, Munroe Falls, Northfield, Northfield Center Township, Peninsula, Reminderville, Sagamore Hills, Silver Lake, Stow, Tallmadge, Twinsburg and Twinsburg Township. According to the Stow Municipal Court, it handles about 20,000 cases per year.

Based on previous judicial conduct cases that the Ohio Supreme Court has decided, the justices are most likely to follow one of three scenarios:

• Uphold the Board of Professional Conduct's recommendation to suspend Hoover, but shorten the term of his sanction. The justices could decide to set aside (or "stay") part of the suspension — a way of acknowledging judicial conduct rules were violated but that a lighter punishment is warranted for the infractions.

• Uphold the recommendation and suspend Hoover for a full two years. Although his judgeship will have ended before two years is up, this could prevent him from being appointed as a visiting judge during retirement until after the suspension has been lifted.

• Side with Hoover's appeal and overturn the board's recommendation to suspend him.

Lisa Colbert, public information manager for the Ohio Supreme Court, said that there is "no set schedule of when a decision or opinion may be released in a case."

"Each case that comes before the Supreme Court is unique in its facts and issues of law, which the justices consider," Colbert said.

Lyn Tolan, the director of public information for the Supreme Court of Ohio, declined to say whether Hoover would be barred from serving as an assigned, or visiting, judge.

"Every situation is unique, and we do not speculate on any individual case or potential future assignments," Tolan said.

According to the 2023 Guidelines for Assignment of Judges, which Tolan provided, "a sitting or retired judge is ineligible for assignment when the judge was removed or suspended without reinstatement from service on any Ohio court…or resigned or retired from service on any Ohio court while a complaint was pending against the person."

This article originally appeared on Akron Beacon Journal: Ohio Supreme Court still deliberating Stow Judge Kim Hoover suspension