Clark Municipal Court Judge Antonio Inacio is facing a flurry of ethics charges over various actions allegedly taken from the bench, including presiding over cases involving summonses issued by police officers and municipal employees who were his private legal clients and making inappropriate remarks to litigants.
A complaint filed by the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC), details multiple instances where Inacio’s conduct is called into question.
Inacio was appointed by Mayor Salvator Bonaccorso, who is facing criminal charges for allegedly operating his business out of his township office, using municipal resources such as faxes, printers, and computers to run the company, witness tampering, plus falsifying records.
Bonaccorso, a Republican who for six terms has served as mayor of Clark, gained notoriety after a police lieutenant secretly taped him using racial slurs to refer to Black people and it was revealed that officials kept a $400,000 settlement with the officer secret, indicating the payoff was intended to protect the politicians.
Attorney General Matthew Platkin announced the charges against Bonaccorso during a press conference where officials also released a scathing 43-page report alleging police brass of violating the department’s regulations and criticizing Bonaccorso and town police officials for making “disturbing” racist comments caught on secret recordings.
Among the allegations is the claim that Inacio represented municipal employees in his private legal practice who could potentially appear before him in court.
Specifically, he is accused of representing police officers and a code enforcement officer in real estate transactions and divorce proceedings while simultaneously ruling on tickets issued by these officers in his capacity as a judge.
The complaint alleges that Inacio provided interpreting services to Spanish-speaking litigants in court, rather than utilizing a certified interpreter as required by a directive issued by the Administrative Office of the Courts..
In one particularly concerning incident, Republican Inacio is accused of making disparaging remarks to Jamil A. Fowler, a 30-year-old Democrat from Scotch Plains who was a defendant during court proceedings on August 26, 2020.
The complaint cites an exchange where Inacio questioned the defendant about his circumstances and mocked his situation, including his lack of employment and financial stability, as well as his relationship status.
Additionally, the complaint highlights Inacio’s failure to disclose an ethics complaint against him as an attorney, wherein he was accused of signing a client’s name to a court document without authorization.
The man who filed the ethics grievance in that matter was represented by Inacio in a Middlesex County matrimonial case. Inacio admitted that he failed to give his client a written retainer agreement, which violates the rules of professional conduct.
Inacio also signed the client’s name to an Amended Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) “without authorization” and then filed the document “falsely stating that the grievant had personally appeared before him and swore to the signature,” according to the ethics complaint.
Inacio asserted “by way of mitigation and not exculpation” that his son tragically died in November 2020, which was during the same period that the QDRO was signed, and that his son’s death left him emotionally and physically unable to go to his law office.
In response to the allegations, Inacio admitted to many of the factual allegations but offered explanations or mitigating circumstances for some of the incidents. However, he has yet to respond to the latest set of charges.
This is not the first time the Judge has faced disciplinary action. In 2015, he received a reprimand for continuing to represent a local councilman and assisting his daughter in private matters after being appointed to the bench.
The case against Inacio underscores the importance of maintaining impartiality and integrity within the judicial system. The allegations raise serious concerns about the conduct of a sitting judge and highlight the need for a thorough investigation into the matter.