Brooklyn Judge Admonished Over Effort to Avoid Trash Fines
New York’s judicial ethics oversight panel admonished Judge Katherine Levine after finding that she repeatedly brought up her judicial position in communications with the city’s administrative hearings office (OATH). The commission said her references created the appearance that she was seeking special treatment. Levine accepted the admonition, and the fines have been paid.
The case began in March 2024, when sanitation workers found a large accumulation of rubbish, including napkins, papers and egg cartons, in the driveway of Levine’s Borough Park home. She contested the $50 fine, identifying herself as a Kings County Supreme Court justice, but OATH found against her. In 2025, she received two more summonses for uncovered trash containers and did not respond to them. Her balance later rose to $650 after missed hearings and default decisions.
In October 2025, Levine told OATH she had trials and could not spend a day at a hearing, and asked how to pay the fines. She also referred to her judicial work in emails and an online filing. OATH told her it did not settle cases and that she had to follow the same procedures as everyone else.
The commission said invoking judicial office to advance a personal interest violated judicial ethics. Levine, a judge since 2008 with no prior disciplinary history, expressed remorse and embarrassment. Her lawyer said she regretted referring to her position while dealing with a frustrating city-agency matter.
Judicial Ethics Must Apply Equally, Commission Says
A judge’s office cannot be a shortcut around rules applied to everyone else. New York’s Commission on Judicial Conduct admonished Katherine Levine after finding that she repeatedly invoked her judicial title while dealing with sanitation fines at her Brooklyn home, creating the appearance she wanted special treatment.
The matter involved three violations: rubbish left in her driveway in 2024 and two uncovered trash containers in 2025. Levine challenged the first $50 ticket, then failed to respond to the later summonses. After default decisions and missed hearings, her balance rose to $650. When she contacted the city’s administrative tribunal, she cited her trial schedule and judicial role while asking how to resolve the fines.
The Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings said it did not settle cases and that Levine had to follow its procedures like anyone else. The commission concluded that using judicial prestige to pursue a private interest breached ethical obligations. That standard matters precisely because public confidence depends on judges not appearing exempt from ordinary rules.
Levine accepted an admonition, expressed remorse and paid the fines. She had no prior disciplinary history, and the commission imposed no further punishment.
Judge Admits Misstep in Frustrating City Fine Dispute
A dispute over $650 in sanitation fines ended with an ethics admonition for Brooklyn Judge Katherine Levine, who acknowledged that invoking her judicial title was inappropriate. The commission found her references could look like an effort to gain favorable treatment, but Levine expressed remorse and accepted responsibility.
The fines stemmed from trash outside her Borough Park home and uncovered containers. Levine challenged the first $50 ticket, then did not respond to two later summonses. The balance increased after missed hearings and default decisions. In later messages, she said she had trials and asked how she could pay without attending a hearing.
OATH declined to settle and told her to follow its rules and procedures. The commission said judges must not use the prestige of their office for private interests. That is the ethical issue the decision addressed; Levine’s frustration with the process did not excuse her references to her position.
Levine has served as a judge since 2008 and had no prior disciplinary record. The commission determined that an admonition was sufficient, and the fines were eventually paid.
Reported by New York Post, Daily Mail US.
