IN RE:
	Roger M. Fischer	:	Court of Judicial Discipline
	Judge of the Court of Common Pleas	:	Docket No. 7 JD 94
	Sixth Judicial District,	:
	Erie County	:

BEFORE:
	Honorable Joseph F. McCloskey, President Judge Honorable William F. Burns, Judge Honorable Peter DePaul, Judge Honorable Christine L. Donohue, Judge Honorable William C. Cassebaum, Judge Honorable Justin M. Johnson, Judge Honorable Samuel J. Magaro, Judge

AND NOW, this 13th day of April, 1995, based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Court enters the following ORDER:

1. The Respondent is hereby REPRIMANDED. The Court's decision is based in part on the following determinations:

(a) Judge Fischer failed to carry out a fundamental obligation of his position as a jurist in this Commonwealth to render prompt justice. This failure not only prejudiced the litigants appearing before him, but also cast a cloud over the administration of justice in this Commonwealth.

 

(b) Judge Fischer's dereliction of duty in failing to render prompt decisions is all the more regrettable because his cases involved children temporarily placed in foster care. Their futures were dependent on Judge Fischer's disposition of petitions involving the involuntary termination of their mothers' and fathers' parental rights.

 

(c) Even when prodded by letters, from litigants and his colleagues on the bench, urging him to render long overdue decisions, he did not respond with the alacrity and attention to duty which the citizens of this Commonwealth have every right to expect.

 

(d) Judge Fischer failed to request help to meet his obligations and at the same time he participated in many voluntary extra-judicial professional activities. If Judge Fischer had elected not to participate in such elective activities, he could have devoted more time to the mandatory duties of his elected position as a Common Pleas Court judge. His first obligation is to the mandatory duties of his elected position as a Common Pleas Court judge.

 

(e) Although this Court commends Judge Fischer for eventually seeking to establish a system that would enable him to render timely decisions, he did so only after the Judicial Conduct Board initiated this action against him.

 

(f) This Court finds Judge Fischer's conduct has eroded the public's confidence in Pennsylvania's judicial system.

 

(g) This Court's sanction would have been more severe if there was evidence of malicious disregard for the rights of litigants. However, the testimony at the sanction hearing indicates that the Respondent was misguided in his judgment and priorities, and that he had failed to develop an administrative system to handle his case load.

2. The Court directs the Respondent to comply with the terms of his agreement with the Judicial Conduct Board regarding administrative procedures to be followed in managing his case load. The Court specifically notes, however, that neither the Court nor the Board can interfere with the President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County in the administration of that court and its divisions.

3. By this Order, therefore, the Court hereby formally reprimands Judge Fischer for his conduct, which constituted a neglect or failure to perform the duties of his office.