by
52-4 District Judge Kirsten Nielsen Hartig
Update: 9:40 a.m. Friday -- A 2024 psychological report of controversial Troy 52-4 Judge Judge Kirsten Nielsen Hartig concluded she was “unsafe to practice," on the bench, the Detroit Free Press reports.
A complaint filed against the judge this week by the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission over her behavior in the courthouse, mentioned the psychological report, but the results were redacted.
But the Freep reports that the findings are visible in some formats.
The Judicial Tenure Commission requested that the judge undergo a psychological evaluation in 2024. She initially refused to share the results with the commission, but eventually did six months later.
---------
Report From Wednesday
The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission on Wednesday filed a complaint against controversial Troy 52-4 District Judge Kirsten Nielsen Hartig, alleging she bullied staff and "repeatedly attempted to assert control over departments and employees" over whom she had no authority.
The 13-page complaint also alleges that she clashed with the Oakland County Prosecutor's Office, wrongfully dismissed criminal cases, and withheld a report of a psychological examination the Commission ordered her to undergo in April 2024. She eventually turned it over approximately six months after it was completed.
The complaint states that "during the period 2018 through 2023, (Judge Hartig) bullied court personnel and treated court personnel so disrespectfully" and created a climate of fear.
The filing comes after Troy Chief Judge Travis Reeds removed Judge Hartig from hearing felony cases in May. Hartig was first elected to the bench in 2010.
In response to the complaint, Judge Reeds issued a statement Wednesday afternoon:
“The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission plays a key role in maintaining the integrity of our courts. While due process is vital, accountability helps preserve public trust in the judiciary."
"Based on the limited information available to me at the time, I removed Judge Hartig from the most serious cases within the authority I had as chief judge. Now that a formal complaint has been filed, further action may be appropriate. I believe temporarily removing her from her full docket would be in the best interest of the court and the communities we serve.”
The Judicial Tenure Commission will now ask the Michigan Supreme Court to appoint a master to preside over a public hearing on the allegations.
The record of the hearing, along with the master's proposed findings, will go to the Commission, which will make a recommendation to the Supreme Court. The possible outcomes range from censure to suspension to removal from the bench. The Commission could also recommend no action. The Supreme Court will make the final decision.
The Judicial Tenure Commission could also request that the Supreme Court remove the judge pending the outcome of the case.
Daniel Cherrin, a spokesperson for Judge Hartig, issued a response:
"Judge Hartig respects the important role of the Judicial Tenure Commission and is committed to fully participating in the process. After years of inquiry, the Commission has produced a complaint based on disputed claims and a flawed process. Judge Hartig has waited patiently for the opportunity to address these allegations directly and looks forward to doing so."
"The public deserves confidence in both the judiciary and its oversight. That confidence depends on transparency grounded in fact, not fiction. Judge Hartig has served the public and the bench for more than a decade with integrity, transparency, and a commitment to justice. The Commission is expected to do the same."
The complaint alleges that "throughout her judicial tenure, (the judge) has repeatedly treated court employees, court administrators, chief judges, and others discourteous."
In September 2018, the complaint alleges, while on the bench, Judge Hartig berated probation supervisor Patti Bates and court administrator Dana O'Neal, "falsely and disrespectfully accusing Bates and O'Neal of financial mismanagement of drug court funds and of callous disregard for a drug treatment participant."
In October 2019, Judge Hartig criticized court administrator O'Neal for not responding to three emails Hartig had sent that afternoon—while O'Neal was attending a funeral—and for "taking too much time off."
