Trial on Court Officials’ Handling of Misconduct Claim Nears End

A federal judge finished hearing evidence in a civil trial over judiciary officials’ handling of an ex-federal defender’s harassment claim, teeing up closing arguments for next month.

Judge William Young, acting as a visiting judge for the Western District of North Carolina, said Tuesday from his Boston courtroom that closing arguments will take place on Jan. 4 over Caryn Strickland’s allegations that officials botched her sexual harassment complaint against her supervisor. That supervisor, J.P. Davis, has denied sexually harassing her.

The final day of evidence in the trial, which consisted of five half-days of testimony spread out over seven days, featured testimony from Jill Langley. She served as the federal courts’ first Judicial Integrity Officer, a national resource meant to answer court employees’ questions about reporting and filing official complaints about workplace misconduct.

Langley said that she met with Strickland and her husband in February 2019, months after the formal complaint had been made. Langley said she told Strickland that she didn’t have any rights after reporting wrongful conduct under one part of the Employment Dispute Resolution plan—the judiciary’s formal procedures for addressing misconduct claims—but did under another complaint she filed.

Langley said she didn’t know the answer to one of Strickland’s questions, about what would happen if a federal defender refused to comply with a judge’s order to discipline someone over a finding of misconduct. Langley said she later looked into the issue and saw that defenders, who are court appointed, could be removed before the completion of their four-year terms. She said she didn’t recall if she followed up with Strickland about the issue.

Langley—now the director of workplace relations for the US Courts of Appeals for the Tenth and Eighth circuits—also testified that even if a judiciary employee receives inaccurate advice about the process from the judicial integrity officer or those tasked with facilitating EDR complaints, “the language of the plan is what controls.”

Langley was appointed to her former role after a judiciary working group on workplace misconduct recommended creating a national resource on how EDR procedures function. That role is now held by Michael Henry, a former top official at the U.S. Center for SafeSport, which examined misconduct in Olympics and Paralympics sports.

Young also asked Langley a handful of questions, raising the issue of whether the then-federal defender Anthony Martinez—who Strickland had reported to and also accused of retaliation—should have been disqualified.

Martinez has denied the allegation and said he recused himself from the investigation into Strickland’s claims, and judiciary officials have defended him not being disqualified from the EDR process.

Langley said that just because a manager is accused of violating the EDR plan doesn’t mean they should be disqualified from the process.

The case is: Strickland v. US, W.D.N.C., No. 1:20-cv-00066