Judge agrees to unpaid suspension
Bruno collected nearly $400K while missing years of work
Superior Court Judge Alice Bruno, who has collected as much as $400,000 in salary while missing nearly 2 ½ years of work for what she describes as stress-related health problems, has agreed amid an ongoing investigation to a suspension from her position without pay effective June 2.
Bruno’s agreement to suspension with the opportunity to apply for a disability retirement was made with the state Supreme Court, which earlier this year ordered an unprecedented investigation into whether to remove a constitutionally appointed judge for behavior that reflected badly on the judiciary. Judicial Branch administrators had been sparring with Bruno for years over what began as spotty attendance at work and turned into prolonged absence.
Bruno said that hostility from judiciary administrators caused undisclosed health problems to deteriorate to the point that she had to schedule medical appointments during the hours of court operation and was unable to complete assignments or finish writing decisions.
“It evolved,” Bruno said in brief responses during a first-of-it’skind hearing before the Supreme Court in early April. “And it was a culmination of many things, many different kinds of feedback from the branch and being told that I was not able to do the job. It was difficult to continue and try to do a job that you are being told you cannot do.”
The alleged hostility “culminated” in August 2019, four years after she was appointed to the bench by former Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, when she claimed Chief Court Administrator Patrick Carroll III urged her to retire. She said the alleged hostility started the day she was confirmed by the legislature.
“The day I finished testifying
before the legislature I was told I couldn’t do the job,” Bruno said. “Before I was even put on the bench, sir. So it was insidious, and it continued throughout the time I was on the bench.”
Bruno negotiated her suspension with state Inspector General Robert Devlin, a former Superior Court Judge and federal prosecutor appointed by the Supreme Court to investigate Bruno’s conduct in what appeared to be the run-up to her removal. Although appointed to investigate Bruno, the Supreme Court authorized Devlin to negotiate a resolution that could cut short what has become an embarrassing stand-off with a judge.
Bruno has said in court filings and in her brief appearance for the Supreme Court that it was her hope to reach some sort of accommodation with the Judicial Branch that would allow her to work as a judge at a location relatively close to her home and and among supportive colleagues. She claimed judicial administrators refused to accommodate her and instead assigned her to a courthouse where, in her view, the administrative judge was hostile to her.
At one point, she decided to pursue a disability retirement that would have entitled her to about $120,000 a year, or about two-thirds of her salary. Since October 2020, Bruno said she have been trying to return to work, but has been blocked by the court administration. Bruno has now decided to pursue a disability retirement.
“Judge Bruno is clearly dismayed that issues involving her medical conditions interfered with her ability to continue to serve as a judge,” her lawyer, Jacques Pareteau, said. “Judge Bruno values the positive feedback she received during her time on the bench, and continuing to this day, from those who know her best. It is important to note that Judge Bruno has not been found to have violated the Judicial Code. By agreeing to this resolution of the Court’s investigation, Judge Bruno has rightly focused her attention on maintaining her health as an essential priority while she pursues a disability retirement.”
Bruno also is continuing to press a complaint with the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities in which she asserts that she suffers from a medical disability and the state has refused to provide her with an appropriate accommodation. The commission is empowered to award damages and its decisions can precede disability rights suits.
Bruno signed what is referred to as a “statement of Resolution” with Devlin on May 18. The Supreme Court approved it May 20 and published it Monday morning.
Under the resolution, effective June 2, Devlin will end his investigation into Judge Bruno’s fitness, but reserves the right to reopen and file a report with the Supreme Court if Bruno were to fail to comply with the terms.
Bruno agreed to “an immediate and voluntary suspension from judicial office without pay.” Bruno’s state health coverage will remain in force through June 30, allowing her to shift to coverage under Medicare.
Bruno will pursue a pending application for a disability retirement with the Judicial Review Council, a secretive state agency that resolves complaints against judges. If the council approves her application, she will accept the disability retirement and retire.
Should the council deny Bruno’s application for disability retirement, or the application is withdrawn, she has agreed to resign. If the council denies her application, she has the opportunity to appeal.
If she resigns, Bruno can pursue pension benefits based on her state service, which includes her time as a judge and previous employment as a court clerk.
By signing the resolution, Bruno did not admit that her behavior violated the code of conduct for judges. She also reserved the right to petition the Supreme Court to keep the agreement secret.