Wisconsin Supreme Court suspends Dane County judge over ‘intemperate’ behavior

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has agreed to suspend Dane County Circuit Judge Ellen Berz for seven days after concluding she committed judicial misconduct.

The unpaid suspension comes after the Wisconsin Judicial Commission filed a complaint, alleging that Berz had violated ethics rules that require judges to act as a neutral party and to treat people in their courtrooms with respect, courtesy and self-control.

Steve Caya and Andrew Rima, attorneys who represented Berz, declined to comment on the suspension Tuesday.

Berz’s suspension will start June 26, according to a state Supreme Court order released Tuesday. The discipline stems from two incidents — one in May 2019 and another in December 2021, according to Tuesday’s order.

Court documents: Judge demanded bailiff arrest man who hadn’t appeared in court, started driving to the hospital herself to pick him up

During the 2021 incident, court documents describe how Berz became frustrated when a man named Noah Hodges did not appear in court on charges including a repeat offense of operating a vehicle while under the influence.

Instead of issuing a bench warrant for Hodges’ arrest or rescheduling the proceeding for a later date, court documents say Berz ordered court staff to figure out where he was.

After learning that Hodges was in the emergency room of a hospital in Sun Prairie, Berz told the bailiff, who is responsible for handling security in her courtroom, to arrest Hodges.

After being told the bailiff didn’t have the authority to do so, Berz announced to people who were gathered in the courtroom that she would go to the hospital herself to pick up Hodges.

“Judge Berz also stated that, if something happened to her when she went to pick up Hodges, they would hear about it on the news,” documents filed with the state Supreme Court say.

According to the order, Berz told Hodges’ attorney to come with her, and the attorney rode in the passenger seat of the judge’s personal car while Berz drove from Madison toward Sun Prairie. Berz told the attorney not to tell her client they were on their way, the order says.

“Hodges’ attorney told Judge Berz that this trip was a bad idea, as the judge is to be the neutral decision maker in the case,” read the Supreme Court’s order. “Judge Berz told Hodges’ attorney that, if she truly thought they should turn around, they would do so. Hodges’ attorney said that they should turn around.”

Berz did eventually agree to turn back before the pair reached the hospital. She ordered a warrant for Hodges’ arrest after stating that court bailiffs had “refused” to arrest Hodges.

Hodges later pleaded guilty to a repeat offense of operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance.

Berz’s conduct in Hodges’ case “went well beyond an ordinary display of frustration with the travails of the courtroom,” the order said.

“Judge Berz lost her judicial composure completely,” the Supreme Court concluded. “Judges cannot behave so impulsively and still expect litigants and the public to trust that the court system will administer fair, measured, evenhanded justice.”

Justices also cite exchange with man who had asked for trial date to be pushed back

Also cited was a 2019 exchange, which justices described as unacceptable, albeit less serious than the 2021 episode.

During that incident, attorneys for a man named Richard Harrison had asked for more time to prepare for trial in a child sexual assault case after making several similar requests previously.

Berz did agree to grant the extension, but she told the courtroom, “I agree with [the prosecutor] that, in all probability, this will turn out to be a ruse. And if it does and if he is convicted at trial, this Court will not forget that. Let’s just make that abundantly clear.”

Berz added, “And just let me make this abundantly clear to you, Mr.
Harrison. You’re not playing that game anymore after this. It’s not a look, I found another rabbit in the hat; look, there might be something underneath this rug. If this trial — when this trial is rescheduled, we’re not playing that game. So play the game with other people you’re with. Go to the prison and talk to them about all the games you can play. We’re done here. Clear? Mr. Harrison, clear?”

Harrison then responded “Your sarcasm is extremely clear,” which kicked off a back-and-forth between Harrison and the judge, before Harrison’s attorney and the prosecutor cut in.

“Good. I thought it would be,” Berz said. “That’s why I’m saying it to you that way, because I thought you would relate with that.”

“I don’t,” Harrison replied.

“I think you do,” Berz said.

“I don’t,” repeated Harrison.

A jury later found Harrison guilty of sexually assaulting a child and violating the terms of his bail, but his case is being appealed.

During her exchange with Harrison, Berz failed to maintain objectivity, open-mindedness and decorum, justices concluded.

“By telling Harrison that ‘in all probability’ the continuance he requested to pursue exculpatory evidence ‘will turn out to be a ruse,’ and if so, ‘this Court will
not forget that,’ Judge Berz failed to exhibit these necessary qualities,” the Supreme Court concluded. “Her subsequent back-and-forth exchange with Harrison was likewise unbecoming of a judge. Judges are to be above the fray, not part of it.”

Berz was first elected as a Dane County judge in 2012. She was reelected most recently in 2024 after running unopposed for a six-year term on the bench.

In a 2024 analysis published after the judicial commission complaint against Berz had become public, the Madison-based Capital Times found that lawyers had filed requests to remove Berz from their cases hundreds of times since 2020 — far more than the number of substitution requests filed for any other Dane County judge.

Suspension of judges is relatively rare in Wisconsin

Wisconsin Justice Jill Karofsky, a former Dane County Circuit Court judge, did not participate in the decision to discipline Berz.

In their decision, justices stopped short of removing Berz from her judgeship, writing that a seven-day suspension should be enough to send a message about the importance of impartiality and professionalism.

“We note that the incidents described above appear to be aberrations in Judge Berz’s otherwise sound judicial career, ” the justices wrote. “We note, too, that Judge Berz has accepted full responsibility and expressed remorse for her misconduct. This gives us confidence that Judge Berz understands that her behavior reflected poorly on her court and on the judiciary as a whole.”

Nonetheless, the suspension of a Wisconsin judge is “pretty unusual,” said Chad Oldfather, a Marquette University law professor who studies judges.

“You’ve got to get through a couple of layers of review before a case like this would even make it to the state Supreme Court for the possibility of suspension,” Oldfather said. “For something to get to that point, you’ve got to be dealing with fairly serious and legitimate accusations.”

Between 1978 and 2024, a total of 15 Wisconsin judges were suspended as a result of public disciplinary cases, according to report published by the Wisconsin Judicial Commission last year. Over that nearly 50-year period, a total of three judges were removed from their posts and a dozen judges were reprimanded as a result of those proceedings.

Earlier this year, the Wisconsin Supreme Court suspended Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, citing a criminal case that’s pending against her. That decision did not come in response to a specific complaint, but rather from the justices’ own initiative, according to the order.

Federal prosecutors allege Dugan helped a man evade arrest by immigration agents at the Milwaukee County courthouse. The man, who was allegedly in the country without legal status, was scheduled to appear in Dugan’s courtroom on domestic violence charges.

The Wisconsin Judicial Commission filed its complaint against Berz in October 2024. That was the lone complaint brought by the commission to the state Supreme Court in 2024, according to a commission report.

That year, the commission got more than 600 “initial inquiries” about judicial conduct, which resulted in seven investigations. In 2024, the commission dismissed three investigations with no action and dismissed five others with a warning. Berz’s disciplinary case was still pending by the time the commission released its year-end report for 2024.

The judicial commission has nine members, some of whom are appointed by the governor and others who are appointed by the state Supreme Court. When it comes to disciplining Wisconsin judges, the commission typically presents its case to a three-judge panel before the state Supreme Court makes a final decision.

Although the process for handling judicial misconduct varies by state, it is “somewhat rare” for judges to be suspended in Wisconsin and across the nation, said Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

“[Nationwide] the overall judicial disciplinary process is sometimes critiqued from both sides as being overly lenient on judges or as being too harsh on judges,” Godar said. “It’s really difficult to strike this balance between accountability for judicial officers while wanting to preserve the independence of state courts and state judges.”