Sex, Drugs, Cronyism, and Lies: Judge Kreis in the Hot Seat as Commission on Judicial Performance Details Alleged Judicial Code Violations

Judge Greg Kreis photo and a photo of the Proof Of Service to the Notice of Formal Proceedings.

As local election campaigns are heating up, the race for Humboldt Superior Court Judge has just become far more interesting, and the Commission on Judicial Performance has served up that political tea you just might have been missing- complete with allegations of sex, drugs, cronyism, and lies.  Humboldt County’s current Presiding Judge, the Honorable Judge Gregory J. Kreis (formerly Elvine-Kreis) faces 19 charges outlined in a formal judicial commission inquiry detailing an astounding array of allegations including improper courtroom and personal conduct, as well as ethical violations over the course of the past several years. 

Gregory Kreis was appointed as a County Superior Court Judge by Governor Jerry Brown in 2017, and is now making a bid for reelection facing a challenger, April Van Dyke this March. 

In a scandal that is moderately well-known from 2019, during a boat party at Shasta Ruth Lake, Kreis allegedly hurled antisemitic insults at a member of the local legal community and is reported to have assaulted him in front of several colleagues. That matter has been legally settled, but now, the Commission on Judicial Performance has released a document overflowing with everything from allegations of highly inappropriate sexual behavior to not recusing himself from cases where he has friendships, partnerships, and close acquaintanceships with those appearing before him in court. This controversy comes at a critical time, as Kreis is in the midst of his reelection campaign, with voting day less than a month away.

The 35 page Notice of Formal Proceedings filed and served via direct personal service, on February 2 by the Commission on Judicial Performance comes less than a month ahead of the March 5 Election Day, and coincides with the delivery of local mail-in ballots across the county. 

Judge Kreis responded to our email request for comment (and invitation for interview) by providing an Instagram post addressing the controversy. There, he claims that he had only become aware the CJP Notice of Formal Proceedings on the 7th of February, in spite of the attached Proof of Service for the Notice indicating that the document was hand delivered to Judge Kreis at the courthouse five days earlier, on February 2, at precisely 1:33 PM by a local process server with Redwood Legal Services, in Eureka. 

Judge Kreis’ offered this public Instagram post in lieu of an email reply when reached for comment.

Leonard Perry Jr, registered Process Server with Redwood Legal, confirmed via telephone Thursday afternoon, that he did indeed personally and directly serve Judge Kreis on Friday, February 2 as noted on the last page of the filing. 

The attached Proof Of Service to the Notice of Formal Proceedings indicates that Judge Kreis was served via direct personal service at the courthouse, on February 2 at 1:33 PM, signed under penalty of perjury by the registered process server who performed the hand delivery to Kries. This information contradicts Kreis’ assertion that he only found out February 7, the same day a press release alerting local media was circulated.

Mr. Perry explained how the service unfolded in detail. Perry stated that he requested a staff member bring Judge Kreis to the hallway for the purpose of receiving a document intended for personal service, which they did without delay. Perry further described how Kreis behaved upon being personally served, saying that the two men exchanged a cordial hello upon handing the filed Notice of Formal Proceedings to Judge Kreis himself, who identified himself by name, and who then shook Mr. Perry’s hand after being handed the filing, and they both went their separate ways. 

Allegations

Of those 19 individual counts against Kreis, a range of serious judicial ethical violations and violations of rules of judicial performance were noted, along with violations of California government code sections, multiple affronts to California’s Constitutional protection of due process, and courtroom conduct described as “abuse of authority” with respect to the Judge’s job performance. Several times in the document, Kreis is further alleged to have conducted himself in a way that was “prejudicial to the administration of justice” such that his behavior “brings the judicial office into disrepute” per California Constitution article VI section 18.  

The extensive list of judicial and personal misdeeds attributed to Judge Kreis are shocking, and run the gamut from inappropriate and distasteful tongue-in-cheek commentary about local attorneys and parties to litigation, to more serious instances of verbal abuse such as openly calling a female attorney a “bitch” in the courtroom – to far more troubling allegations of criminal activity in private and public settings.  These allegations sit alongside work-related abuses such as “infringement of personal rights”, “abuse of power”, and outright disregard for due process in the course of handling litigation. 

Crucial to a judge’s obligation as an impartial arbiter of justice, they are held to a higher standard of ethics than other elected officials, both in public and in private. Perhaps the most egregious example of personal misconduct alleged in the CJP’s Notice is found in Count Fifteen, which paints a disturbing picture of Kries, reportedly at a party thrown by a colleague, where he is alleged to have pulled down his pants and presented his penis, unsolicited, toward the face of a sleeping female attorney, as he attempted to wake her.  

The Commission on Judicial Performance’s Notice addressing Kreis reveals specific and private details, as well as direct quotes pulled from court records, proceeding transcripts, and presumably, from investigative interviews of witnesses to his behavior in and out of the courtroom. Judge Kreis is attributed with dozens of ethical violations within the 19 counts against him, often concerning his refusal to comply with legal disqualifications, and his alleged disregard for conflict of interest  arising from long standing personal relationships with various members of the legal community wherein he failed to recuse himself. These alleged breaches of judicial ethics occurred repeatedly in multiple court proceedings, with claims of bias influencing the outcomes of several of the cases.

Appearance of Impropriety

While the description of Kreis and two local attorneys allegedly partaking of a cocaine-fueled joyride (Count Eighteen), or the account where Kreis is alleged to have driven while drunk with a car full of passengers (Count Sixteen) are indeed salacious claims, and if true, would likely be serious ethical violations – and still, those behavioral blunders are not directly impacting the outcomes of court cases, whereas a verified conflict of interest at the bench would have potentially devastating effects on a case. 

Protections against bias on the bench are stringent partly because of the insidious nature of implicit bias, which is naturally difficult to recognize but potentially devastating in its effects, and therefore is guarded against by relying on a judge’s obligation and ability to responsibly remove themselves from cases when appropriate. This is outlined in Code of Judicial Ethics which reads in part, “A judge shall disclose information that is reasonably relevant to the question of disqualification…, even if the judge believes there is no actual basis for disqualification.”

Judges are expected to make every effort to avoid even “the appearance of impropriety in all activities”, within or outside of the courthouse, per national and state rules of judicial conduct. Several examples of Kreis’ failure to recognize a conflict of interest are cited in the Notice of Formal Proceedings, and each of them overlap with other ethical code violations, as alleged by the CJP.  Over thirty different court cases are listed within the document as cases which Kries should have or would have been removed from due to conflict of interest. 

The CJP criticized Kreis for not recusing himself from several cases where there was a clear conflict of interest. One notable example in Count Five highlights a significant alleged failure to step back from a case where one of the attorneys was his personal friend and was also the partner of the attorney who was representing him in a civil harassment lawsuit connected to allegations from the 2019 Ruth Lake boat party.

In other matters, the conflict of interest was reflected within his relationship to a party to the case, such as in Count Twelve, where the CJP asserts, “You did not disqualify yourself from the case until on or about June 23, 2021.”  By the time Judge Kreis had recused himself from that case in 2021, he had already ordered in 2019 sole legal and physical custody of the couple’s young child to the mother, who was a client of his then wife, and further “permitted  [her] to move with the daughter to England” despite failing to adequately identify and address the concern of conflict of interest to the opposing party, thereby again violating several ethical codes according to the CJP. 

Another striking accusation detailed in Count Three of the Notice of Formal Proceedings by the Commission on Judicial Performance involved the inner-courthouse rumor mill, and the awareness of courthouse staff that Kreis had been involved in an extramarital affair as early as 2017 (while he presided over the family law court) with an attorney employed within the family law division of the courthouse – despite the appearance of impropriety it gave to other staff members or the public. Not only was Kries alleged to have been romantically involved with a woman who worked under him, but he is now accused of actively suppressing that fact. 

It is alleged within the filing that he lied to the Presiding Judge at the time, in an attempt to preserve the secrecy of his office romance- all while being still married, and presiding over the family law division. The CJP writes, “by making false or misleading statements to Presiding Judge Hinrichs and CEO Bartleson, and not correcting them, you violated the Code of Judicial Ethics… .”  

A photo taken in October of 2022 showing Judge Gregory Kreis and Courthouse Family Law Department Attorney Tanya Ellis together on vacation was posted to Ellis’ personal page. Ellis is also currently functioning as Kreis’ Campaign Treasurer.

Not only is Kreis accused of misrepresenting the truth of the matter, but he is described as having “asked Judge Hinrichs what was going to be done about [a staff member allegedly talking about the romance],” and that several months later, the staff member who had made the initial complaint regarding the inappropriate relationship between Kries and Ellis was terminated from employment following Kries’ claim that the rumor was false. 

Allegations of Abuse of Power

In addition to the above violations, the CJP wrote that Kreis openly mocked local attorneys in open court. Judge Kreis is quoted several times making derogatory statements directly to, or about local attorneys, in and away from the courthouse. Parties to litigation were no exception, according to the description of specific cases in the document that included Judge Kreis allegedly expressing bias or prejudgement openly in the court.

One such instance detailed in the pleading involved attorney Edward Schrock, who on many occasions according to the CJP filing allegedly was berated on several occasions. Under Count Thirteen, the document reads, “You abused your authority when you threatened to report Mr. Schrock to the State Bar without a valid basis for doing so.” Another violation was after Schrock had attempted to disqualify Kries from a custody case. The CJP alleged, “Your reference to an allegation made against you in motion to disqualify you reflected, embroilment, and, at a minimum, made it appear that you were retaliating against the father. Many of your statements also reflected prejudgment.” 

After the Allegations

An inquiry to Humboldt County Superior Court CEO Meara Hattan was returned acknowledging the matter, but stating that the court was not at liberty to discuss pending litigation. 

If he is found by the court in San Francisco to be accountable for any number of the 19 individual counts alleged, the CJP is able to take punitive actions against him. This could mean being removed from the bench entirely, being censured, being publicly admonished, or having private disciplinary action taken against him by the Commission on Judicial Performance. 

As a matter of process, Kreis is entitled to twenty days from the date of service (February 2, 2024) to file his response in San Francisco. Accordingly, the Judge’s written response is expected on or before February 22, as noted by the Commision on Judicial Performance in its press release. 

Voting on March 5

Judge Kreis’ opponent in this upcoming election told us that her inspiration to run for the judgeship was motivated by what she believed was a need for the courthouse to generally do better.  April Van Dyke told us, “While I acknowledge the general preference for supporting an incumbent judge, my decision to run for the position stemmed from my observations of my opponent engaging in conduct in the courtroom that I considered questionable.” 

When asked if she had ever been accused of similar indiscretions, Van Dyke replied via email stating, “I have never faced allegations of criminal wrongdoing or ethical misconduct. I diligently worked to obtain my legal license, consistently upholding my ethical responsibilities with the highest degree of seriousness.”  Van Dyke added, “Being an attorney is a privilege I do not take lightly.  If granted this opportunity, I pledge to uphold the professional code of ethics without compromise, aspiring to become a judge that Humboldt County can be proud of.” 

Eric Kirk, local civil litigation attorney and political talk show host at Redwood Wonk, told us he thought that the timing of the Commission’s Notice being served the same week that voters are receiving their ballots in the mail was interesting, and possibly not coincidental, given the fact that Kries is running for reelection as Superior Court Judge. 

This litigation brought by the Commission on Judicial Performance (JPC) comes with serious possible consequences for Kreis if the allegations against him are found to be “proven by clear and convincing evidence”.  

If Judge Kreis is eventually found guilty by the CJP, and is then removed from the bench, there may be potentially far-reaching consequences within the courthouse for those cases which Judge Kreis had issued rulings or orders in- and could set the stage for appeals to cases that Kreis had improperly adjudicated. 

Civil Attorney Eric Kirk did tell us, “I’m pretty sure a conflict of interest could be grounds for reversal or new trial.”  

As for the possibility of rulings being overturned in the event that Kreis is removed from judgeship, Kirk said, “I’m not sure what happens to the judgments, or how far back any challenges can go,” but added, “I’ve heard of criminal convictions being challenged, but if you’re in jail there isn’t really a statute of limitations.  Normally an appeal has to be filed within 60 days, but I imagine there could be [a written agreement that suspends the statute of limitations].” 

Ultimately, when the Commission on Judicial Performance issues a ruling on the charges against Kreis, if found to be true, that still isn’t the end of the matter. Kreis could ask for a higher court review. According to the CJP press release, “A determination by the commission to remove, censure, or admonish a judge is subject to discretionary review by the Supreme Court upon petition by the judge.” 

The race for the bench is often overlooked in local politics and news, generally being considered a less important vote, despite local judges being in position of authority over nearly every aspect of personal or social contentions that are litigated via civil, criminal or family law matters. A judge can make or break it for a person relying on the judicial system for fairness and impartiality, with the swipe of a pen or the press of a filing stamp. 

Looking ahead to the election, voters have some serious allegations to weigh before placing their vote for local Superior Court Judge – a position that wields big power over everyday people, often at the most desperate times in their lives.  In Humboldt County, a whopping 89% of registered voters receive mail-in ballots according to data provided by the state, and in the 2020 presidential primary, Humboldt saw more than 62,000 mail-in ballots. While most voters may not have marked their ballots yet, some already have, without the benefit of being privy to these allegations of the courthouse’s dirty laundry, currently being aired out by the official judicial body charged with oversight. 

Before a hearing on the charges takes place, Judge Kreis is required to file a response to the allegations listed in the Notice of Formal Proceedings, in the designated court in San Francisco, due no later than February 22. This document will also be made available to the public, according to the CJP.

Please remember, as stated in the notice from CJP, “commencement of formal proceedings is not a determination of judicial misconduct.” After receiving Judge Kreis’ filed response, “a hearing will be conducted by special masters appointed by the Supreme Court.” Then a determination will be made.

In the interest of transparency, this reporter also works as a Legal Assistant in Humboldt County, primarily in family law in the same firm as Eric Kirk (Please note that we failed to note Ryan’s connection to Kirk in the original post. Kirk’s firm also advertises with us. Our apologies for failing to mention this earlier.)

Please reach out to [email protected] or [email protected] if you have a related story you want us to know about.

UPDATE: Judge Kreis Denies Personal Indiscretion, Judicial Complaints: Alleges Other Candidates Saw ‘Blood In The Water’