JudgeJosephIsabella.JPG

The Supreme Court said Judge Joseph Isabella, shown here in 2012, did not observe the high standard of conduct expected of Superior Court judges.

(Star-Ledger file photo)

TRENTON — The New Jersey Supreme Court has disciplined a state judge for asking the Nutley school board to help pay for summer camp for his girlfriend's son.

The high court on Tuesday admonished Superior Court Judge Joseph Isabella, who sits in Hudson County, for making the request for $4,000 "by using Judiciary letterhead and by communicating with others in authority to advance the private interests" of his then-girlfriend. They married in 2011.

In 2008, the judge's girlfriend, identified in court papers only as T.M., wanted to send her special-needs son to a summer camp in Pennsylvania. She made the request on her own at first but it was denied by the Nutley school board, which offered its own summer camp for special-needs students.

Afterward, Isabella used his official letterhead to ask for half the tuition in Pennsylvania, or $4,000, from the school district.

He faxed the letter to the lawyer for the Nutley school board, Frank Pomaco, who was also a close friend of his and a former law partner. The judge then followed up with phone calls to Pomaco and Nutley's schools superintendent, Joseph Zarra, another acquaintance, according to an investigation by the Supreme Court's Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct.

"Camp is $8,000. 1/2 would be great. In light of the fact he'll be going for next 8-9 years while still in Nutley system obviously she's got nothing to lose by litigating," the judge wrote in the letter. "Let me know what you think. Thanks for all your help."

Isabella, a state judge since 2000 who has tenure on the court, acknowledged sending the letter and making the phone calls.

The judicial conduct committee concluded that Isabella "is not simply an attorney or community member, but a Superior Court judge obligated to avoid even the appearance of impropriety."

"He contends that this infraction is not deserving of judicial discipline because it was unintentional," the committee's report said, finding that the judge's "lack of intent or improper motive, however, does not excuse his misconduct."

The Supreme Court adopted that report Tuesday. An admonition is the lightest form of public reprimand for judges. They can also be censured, suspended with or without pay, or removed from office.

"By making those telephone calls ... (Isabella) created the likelihood that his judicial office would influence or color the District's decision, a circumstance which is wholly incompatible with the high standards of conduct demanded of judges under the Code of Judicial Conduct," the committee on judicial conduct said.

Four members of the conduct committee dissented, citing Isabella's "exemplary record and genuine remorse."

They said his use of the letterhead was misguided but that Pomaco and Zarra already knew well that he was a judge, unlike some “outrageous” disciplinary cases in which judges “contacted perfect strangers … and identified their office specifically to use its status for private advantage.”

"What (Isabella) sought was the counsel and assistance of old friends based upon the length and depth of their shared history," the dissent said, suggesting the Supreme Court should have reprimanded the judge privately.

Isabella’s attorney, Ralph Lamparello, said he agreed with the dissent and noted that it was written by retired chief justice James Zazzali, retired justice Virginia Long and two others.

"His testimony was clear: He was just using the letterhead as a cover sheet to get documents over to (Pomaco)," Lamparello said. "That's a technical violation. Judge Isabella is a distinguished and well respected jurist. He's not going to do it again, and he respects the admonishment."

The father of the special-needs child, who is identified in court papers only as A.L, filed the original complaint against Isabella. He was never married to the child's mother but at one point shared a home with her in Nutley.

A.L. also said T.M. was suing him in a separate case, and complained that Isabella acted improperly by providing legal advice to her for that lawsuit. But the disciplinary committee and the Supreme Court dismissed that accusation.

The high court found that Isabella "did not practice law" or violate his code of conduct in that matter. The investigators found his only involvement was to help his girlfriend write down or prepare his girlfriend's "factual answers" for questions relating to her case, which the judge also acknowledged.

RELATED COVERAGE

• State ethics panel says Hudson County judge misused judicial influence

• More Politics

FOLLOW STAR-LEDGER POLITICS: TWITTER | FACEBOOK