Money-hungry city officials routinely coerce judges to impose maximum fines on businesses for alleged violations — even if there isn’t any wrongdoing, according to a bombshell new lawsuit.
Judge Michelle Mirro — the city’s longest-serving administrative-law jurist — claims in papers filed in Brooklyn federal court today that her bosses at the Department of Consumer Affairs are now trying to boot her from her post because she complained about the practice.
“[The city officials] took the judge out of the word ‘judge,’ ” her lawyer, Stewart Karlin, said to The Post.
“There were concerted efforts against the businesses to impose the maximum fines,’’ he charged. “These could be crushing — some of these fines ran into the six figures.”
The strong-arming began when the DCA’s Nancy Schindler was appointed director of the Adjudication Division, which oversees Mirro and the other judges, and Bruce Dennis was brought on as her deputy in 2008, the suit states.
The new regime — operating under Bloomberg-appointed Commissioner Jonathan Mintz — immediately began scrutinizing any ruling that took mercy on a business owner, the lawsuit says.
“Dennis’ approval was now required on any . . . decision in which the [judge] does not find the respondent at the hearing guilty with the imposition of a maximum fine,” the suit claims.
“Schindler and Dennis began to pressure the administrative-law judges to find in favor of the DCA and impose maximum fines,” the suit states.
Mintz — who was appointed in 2006 — heartily endorsed the practice, according to the filing.
“It is currently the pattern and practice of the defendants to illegally pressure each of the [judges] to find in favor of the DCA and impose the maximum fine,” the suit states. “Commissioner Mintz has consistently approved of this pattern and practice.”
Mirro cited several examples of her initial rulings getting reversed.
She found a gas station not guilty of a violation in January — but “after repeated revisions to her decision, Judge Mirro was forced to find the respondent guilty and impose a fine of $20,000,” the lawsuit says.
Just last month, Mirro also fined a tour-bus company a manageable $700. But “ultimately, the supervisors overruled Judge Mirro’s recommendation and found the respondent guilty of 10 of 11 charges, imposing a fine of $11,200,” the suit states.
Fed up, the veteran judge began to raise objections about the practice.
Mirro said that as a result, she was retaliated against.
She claims she was overloaded with cases to delay her decisions, and her performance appraisals sank for the first time in nearly two decades as an administrative judge. The DCA is now trying to boot her, her lawyer said.
“Judge Mirro and other [judges] were threatened with disciplinary action, based on false allegations that decisions were not made in a timely manner and not found in favor of the DCA,” the suit states.
The city’s Law Department said in a statement today, “We’re reviewing these new claims and will respond appropriately.”
“The timing of this lawsuit is curious given that the plaintiff was charged by DCA with incompetence a few months ago.”
Additional reporting by Sally Goldenberg