Gay couple files complaint against judge in custody case

By Jen Colletta
PGN Staff Writer
© 2008 Philadelphia Gay News

A gay New Jersey couple seeking to become the primary caregivers for one partner’s biological child has filed a request for investigation into misconduct on the part of a Superior Court judge, who they asserted has repeatedly ignored the best interests of the child because of his alleged aversion to same-sex parents.

Steven Zorowitz, a New Jersey attorney, and his partner filed a complaint with the Supreme Court of New Jersey Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct against Judge Angelo DiCamillo. The couple alleges that a series of rulings and statements by DiCamillo violated the Criminal Law of New Jersey and the New Jersey Code of Judicial Conduct. Additionally, Zorowitz and his partner asked the ACJC to investigate Ronald Manos, an attorney for Zorowitz’s partner’s former wife, the child’s mother, who they allege also took part in misconduct, by taking part in out-of-court communications with the judge, among other allegations.

Calls to Manos were not returned; DiCamillo declined to comment on matters pending before the court.

Zorowitz and his partner are scheduled to appear before DiCamillo again today to request that primary custody be transferred to them.

The ACJC is composed of nine individuals who are retired New Jersey justices and judges, as well as members of the bar and of the public. If an investigation reveals that a judge took part in judicial misconduct, the committee can recommend to the New Jersey Supreme Court public reprimand, censure, suspension or removal.

ACJC spokesperson Winnie Comfort could not comment on whether the ACJC would investigate the case, citing agency policy.

Zorowitz’s partner first moved to obtain custody of his now nearly 4-year-old son in December 2004. The partner and his former wife had separated before the child was born and later divorced.

The court did not rule on the custody of the child for 11 months, during which time Zorowitz said the mother prevented him and the father from seeing the child.

The child’s mother’s home was eventually named as the primary place of residence, and the father and Zorowitz were granted partial custody.

After consultation with a court-appointed therapist, Zorowitz and his partner were ordered to move from their home in Astoria, N.Y., to South Jersey before being granted overnight stays with the child.

Lauren Kane, an attorney representing Zorowitz and his partner, said she had never heard of a couple having to move to another state as a prerequisite for partial custody, and speculated that this order would not have been handed down to a heterosexual couple. Zorowitz and his partner did, however, comply with the judge’s order and moved to the Garden State.

Zorowitz and his partner see the child for three hours every Wednesday night and the child stays overnight at their house every other weekend.

Zorowitz asserted that the mother has repeatedly made disparaging remarks in the child’s presence about him and his partner and also intentionally missed scheduled times when the partner was supposed to pick up the child from her home. Zorowitz said the child often was given to them by the mother with unchanged diapers and had been absent during 30 percent of preschool.

Last summer, Zorowitz’s partner filed a Notice of Motion for modification of the custody order, seeking for his and Zorowitz’s household to become the child’s primary place of residence.

A Superior Court judge denied the petition but did order the court-appointed therapist who had previously been assigned to the case to re-evaluate the parties involved.

At this time, DiCamillo replaced the other judge on the case and, when the therapist asked for further qualification as to what his duties were supposed to be, DiCamillo refused to clarify the previous judge’s order.

Zorowitz said the judge remarked several times throughout the Nov. 30 hearing about his heavy workload and said he did not want to bring this case to trial. The judge told Zorowitz’s partner that if he desired, he could hire his own therapist who could evaluate the parties and then report back to the court, although he asserted numerous times throughout the preceding that he put no merit in expert testimony.

“He in a sense hamstrung us from being able to bring to the court testimony of an expert that could lead to the best interest of the child being met,” Zorowitz said. “Rather than do his duty to clarify the order of the predecessor judge, Judge DiCamillo denigrated all experts, and also ordered us to hire a second expert to consult with the first. It was one of the most bizarre orders I’d ever heard. It was extremely prejudicial to suggest that we should hire the expert at an enormous cost to us. What he was doing was deliberate. It was meant to further frustrate us in acting in the child’s best interest and to turn us away and stop us from asserting any role in his life.”

Zorowtiz said he and his partner were also frustrated that “the mother has tried to keep the child away from us as much as possible and tried to alienate the child from both his biological father and myself as much as possible. She also communicates as little as possible.”

When they learned that there was an unrelated man living in the mother’s house, Zorowitz and his partner hired an investigator to find out who the individual was. They learned the man was the boyfriend of the mother’s daughter and had a criminal background from another state, where he was convicted of felony and misdemeanor charges for spray-painting swastikas and racist graffiti on a synagogue and high school on two separate occasions. The damage exceeded $1,000, and the defendant was convicted of a “bias/prejudice” crime.

Zorowitz said he and his partner also found the man’s MySpace account, on which he posted a photograph of Hitler, a confederate flag and several pictures of him and his friends handling guns. In one photograph, the man is pointing the gun into his mouth with the caption: “a drunken night (yes that’s a real gun).”

Zorowitz said the man is one of the child’s primary caregivers.

Following the discovery, Zorowitz said he and his partner immediately contacted the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services. A DYFS employee went to the mother’s home but was denied entrance for several hours; when she was permitted into the house, she did not see any firearms.

Zorowitz and his partner again went before DiCamillo June 13, seeking an emergency restraining order against the man.

During the preceding, DiCamillo stated the photos depict the daughter’s boyfriend exercising his Second Amendment right to “play with guns,” and he asserted that because a social worker involved hadn’t returned his phone call, the issue could not be too pressing.

“I’m stunned that a judge would leave a child in a household with a convicted felon caring for the child who is not related to him, rather than to have the child with one of the parents,” Kane said. “Forget they’re gay; it’s just disturbing to me that a judge would leave a child in a situation like that.”

Zorowitz said DiCamillo cut the hearing short and said his partner could apply for an emergency restraining order, but that Family Court “is kind of shut down right now.”

Following this ruling, Zorowitz alleged that DiCamillo conducted several “ex parte” conversations with Manos, in which Kane was not included.

“Apparently Judge DiCamillo and/or members of his staff had conversations with opposing counsel because they’re being notified of hearing changes and being told not to file responses to my paperwork,” Kane said. “I found out about this after the fact.”

Kane said Zorowitz and his partner may request that the judge recuse himself from the case.

Zorowitz said he hopes his and his partner’s household is eventually named the primary place of residence for the child, despite what he said is DiCamillo’s apparent disregard for the child’s best interest.

“He’s obviously not impartial on this issue and not following the law,” Zorowitz said. “I truly believe that if the court were to do the right thing, this child would have been out of that household a long time ago. We don’t want the mother out of the picture, we never did. We just want the child to live a quiet, safe life and have a good future and a decent childhood, which is not what he’s having with them.”

Jen Colletta can be reached at jen@epgn.com.