- Posted October 11, 2013
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Judge fines himself after cellphone rings in court

LANSING (AP) -- The latest perpetrator to run afoul of a Michigan judge's ban on ringing cellphones in his courtroom is the judge himself.
The courtroom of Lansing District Judge High Clarke Jr. has a sign warning visitors to silence their phones, saying they'll be found in contempt if a phone rings.
Clarke was in the middle of a hearing last Friday when his own cellphone rang. So he found himself in contempt of court.
"I reached in my pocket, pulled out 50 bucks, gave it to my court officer and she took it upstairs," Clarke told the Lansing State Journal.
He has a receipt with a 10:29 a.m. time stamp.
"Why would I treat myself any different? That would make me a hypocrite," said Clarke, who joined the bench in 2010.
Clarke said he has imposed penalties for ringing phones five to 10 times since the policy began in May. In fact, he fined a defendant for a ringing phone minutes before his own phone rang.
Clarke said the moral of the story was to leave the phone in his office.
Published: Fri, Oct 11, 2013
headlines Oakland County
- Whitmer signs gun violence prevention legislation
- Department of Attorney General conducts statewide warrant sweep, arrests 9
- Adoptive families across Michigan recognized during Adoption Day and Month
- Reproductive Health Act signed into law
- Case study: Documentary highlights history of courts in the Eastern District
headlines National
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Judge accused of using ‘game or jail’ tactic, asserting abuse victims get ‘Super Bowl’ neurochemicals
- Prosecutor gets suspension for invading jury’s ‘inner sanctum’
- Lateral hiring bounced back in 2024, especially for associates in BigLaw, new NALP report says
- Refugee ban can’t be enforced against those who received conditional approval, 9th Circuit says
- ABA, more than 50 bar associations condemn ‘government actions that seek to twist the scales of justice’