Home / Legal News / Referee seeks inactive disability status for Jill Clark
Judge Gerald Seibel said Clark told the court she is disabled.

Referee seeks inactive disability status for Jill Clark

Jill Clark

Judge Gerald Seibel has recommended to the Supreme Court that judicial candidate Jill Clark be placed on inactive disability status. Seibel, the appointed referee in a disciplinary case against Clark, said that Clark told the court through her attorney and her husband that she is ill, unable to defend herself and had been admitted to the hospital on June 21. However, she later asserted that she is under treatment, able to assist in her own defense, and should not be transferred to disability status. But Seibel said there is no medical evidence supporting that assertion.

“The scenario described herein places both parties and the referee in somewhat of a conundrum. Despite some rather strange filings and arguments recently presented by Respondent, which has resulted in the delay of these proceedings, the Referee is not in a position to state that Respondent has deliberately perpetrated a fraud upon the tribunal. What is clear that Respondent, whatever the cause has asserted that based upon a medical or emotional condition, she was disabled and unable to proceed with the trial in this matter and assist in her own defense,” Siebel wrote.

Clark is a candidate for chief justice of the Supreme Court.  An attorney on inactive status cannot be a candidate.  A candidate must be “learned in the law,” but a candidate who is not admitted or entitled to practice is not “learned in the law,” the Supreme Court decided in In re Daly, 200 N.W.2d 913 (Minn. 1972) and  In re Scarrella, 221 N.W.2d 562 (Minn. 1974)


  1. My curiosity is peaked as to why Jill Clark’s name was not removed from the August 14, 2012 primary ballot, does any one her know and have a moment to please respond? Thank you and best wishes to all. D.L. Munks

  2. We’re all curious about that. I don’t have the answer but I strongly SUSPECT the answer is along the lines of, “Because she sues everybody who looks at her cross-eyed and the folks running the election figured she wouldn’t win anyway, so let sleeping dogs lie.”

    Or, in this case, “Let rabid insomniac dogs bite themselves.”

    For all things concerning Clark’s continuing legal meltdown, including links to PDF copies of the crazy stuff she is filing, check out Johnny Northside Dot Com and my series (now up to Part Thirty) The Madness Of Jill Clark.

  3. John Hoff has a degree in Law but, will never be a lawyer. Seriously, writing a THIRTY part series about Jill Clark? Why would someone be so obsessed with discrediting a lawyer? Not because she has “sued everybody” as Hoff claims but, it is more likely because Clark represented the Plaintiff in the Moore V. Hoff case AND WON! (it was reversed on appeal but, the fact remains, Clark went against him)
    Hoff has been the most vocal enemy of north Minneapolis “slumlords” the past few years, heaving as much negative publicity on them as possible but, today it was confirmed that Hoff has been fined by the city of Minneapolis for operating a rental property without a license AND fined for non-compliance with numerous Truth In Housing violations with his own slum property.
    Today Hoff becomes one of them and is now… Lord of the Slums! Johnny Slumlord!

  4. The reason is Ms. Clark was on the ballot is simple, like everyone else, she is entitled to due process. The referee’s recommendation was not an order, and action of the Supreme Court, and then the Secretary of State would have been necessary to remove her name from the ballot.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *