Justice May Face Ouster--Cheated on Bar Exam

ST. PAUL, Minn. â€”  Minnesota Supreme Court Justice John Todd should be removed from office because he cheated on a bar examination last year by using reference books, a special three-judge panel recommended Friday.

Todd, 57, would be the first member of the state’s Supreme Court to be removed from office if the state Court of Appeals accepts the panel’s recommendations.

Todd violated judicial canons and is “guilty of conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice or conduct unbecoming a judicial officer,� the panel said.

The Court of Appeals, acting in the place of the Supreme Court, will hear oral arguments on the case March 11. Chief Judge Peter Popovich said a decision is expected in 60 to 90 days after that.

Todd’s Status Not Clear

Todd’s status on the high court, where he has served since 1972, until the Appeals Court makes a final decision was not clear.

Todd refused to comment on the panel’s recommendation.

The panel was appointed last November by the Court of Appeals after the court, in a 4-1 decision, rejected an agreement in which Todd agreed to accept public censure for using reference books during a multistate bar examination in July, 1983, but denied that he intended to cheat.

The multistate exam allows attorneys to qualify to practice law outside Minnesota. Todd, who was admitted to practice law in Minnesota in January, 1951, has said he took the additional bar exam because he was considering practicing in Florida when he retires.

Took Examination Alone

Todd arranged to take the examination alone, rather than with several hundred recent law school graduates. The panel concluded that Todd knew that the multistate bar exam was a closed-book test.

Todd maintained that he had received permission from Richard E. Klein, state director of the bar exam, to use reference material during the second test, which he took in Klein’s office.

But the panel found that Todd’s conversation with Klein before the test “furnished no rational or reasonable basis� for the justice to believe he had such permission.