dear margaret, I have found the stock market to be very dull lately but this piece of news I thought was really noteworthy
03:03 PM ET 09/11/97
Judge's dog sexually nuzzled women, lawyer says
By Gail Appleson, Law Correspondent
NEW YORK (Reuter) - A Connecticut judge sexually harassed
women and obstructed their access to courts by allowing his dog
to go up behind them and put its snout under their skirts, a
lawyer alleged Thursday.
In an unusual case before the prestigious U.S. 2nd Circuit
Court of Appeals, the lawyer argued that a district judge erred
in throwing out the case by saying the female plaintiff was
''barking up the wrong tree.''
The Second Circuit handles federal appeals from New York,
Connecticut and Vermont.
The class action suit was filed last year on behalf of all
women who were allegedly attacked in Connecticut Superior Court
in Danbury by Kodak, a golden retriever.
The dog allegedly ``aggressively nuzzled'' the lead
plaintiff, raised her skirt and ``projected its snout upward
toward the plaintiff's crotch,'' according to the suit.
The suit alleges that the plaintiff's constitutional rights
were violated because the judge was acting in his official
capacity when he allowed the dog to assault women and interfere
with their access to the courthouse.
A federal judge in Connecticut had dismissed the suit,
finding that Superior Court Judge Howard Moraghan was not
acting ``under color of state law'' but as a private citizen
when he brought the dog into the courthouse.
Nancy Burton, the plaintiff's lawyer who was also attacked
by the dog, disagreed and told the appeals court that Moraghan
was able to bring his pet into the courthouse because he is a
judge and that allowing the animal to harass women was an
''extension of his judicial persona.''
``This was not a casual, random act on the part of the judge
... it was ritualized,'' Burton told the panel.
She said the judge would bring the dog into the clerk's
office, unleashed and unmuzzled, and watch ``with a smirk on his
face'' as it harassed women.
Burton said the suit also alleges gender discrimination
because the dog only went after women wearing skirts.
Robert Cooney, Moraghan's lawyer, argued that the district's
judge's ruling should be upheld because his client was not
acting in his official capacity when he brought the dog to the
courthouse.
Circuit Judges Ralph Winter and Jon Newman questioned Cooney
as to whether the dog was allowed into the courthouse only
because Moraghan is a judge.
Cooney said that Moraghan was not performing any judicial
function at the time, and was merely walking to his office.
``He wasn't trying to keep anyone out of the clerk's
office,'' he said.
But Newman responded that the case is not about a judge
keeping a dog by his side.
``This case is about a dog harassing women,'' he said.
^REUTER@
Have a nice evening
Frank |
