Ganim Files Court Application To Regain Law License

In 2012, a three-judge panel said no, followed by a unanimous decision by the Connecticut Supreme Court rejecting Joe Ganim’s application to regain a law license stripped following his 2003 conviction on federal corruption charges.

The three-judge panel cited his lack of remorse in rejecting his request nearly a decade ago.

Those court decisions hurt his professional income potential. Who’d pay him a package north of $150K? Not many. Without a law license, what to do? Hey, I’ll run for mayor again.

Political pragmatism kicked in, his first public apology coming New Year’s Day 2015 in the church of State Rep. Charlie Stallworth, a city minister. Ganim ran largely on a second-chance message.

Ganim defeated incumbent Bill Finch in a tight primary on his way to a convincing general election victory and reelection in 2019.

The court calendar allows him to reapply for his law license.

CT Post reporter Dan Tepfer has more:

In the paperwork, Ganim states he intends to practice general law “with a concentration on pro bono representation of indigent individuals and families.”

… In his latest application for reinstatement, Ganim states he is no longer the subject of any pending disciplinary proceedings or investigations; fully complied with all the conditions of his criminal sentence; in August took and passed the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination and paid all fees associated with reinstatement.

In 2020, the city had hired a lawyer for Ganim, then-Chief Armando Perez and David Dunn, then-personnel director, during an FBI probe that later led to the arrest of both Perez and Dunn. The two were accused of rigging the police chief search that led to Perez’s promotion to the chief job. Ganim has not been charged.

The process for reinstatement is generally lengthy with the application first going to the state’s Office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel for investigation, then to a panel of local lawyers for recommendation and then finally to a three-judge panel for the final decision.

Full story here.



  1. Part of the process is questioning whether the Mayor has changed. Is he now a man of integrity? Has he truly changed. How do we measure such a thing. Wait, I know! Keeping promises is the foundation of integrity. The mayor has promised to increase funding for Bridgeport public schools each and every year of his new term.

    My support is once again for sale. I will sell my support for a $6 million added to the city’s share of the Minimum Budget Requirement. We need more but I’m a cheap date.

    And Before someone asks, COVID dollars are not intended for covering operating costs. They are for remediation of learning loss and school environment.

  2. In 2012 the three judge panel commented that Ganim was an “unrepentant felon”.
    To this day, Joe Ganim has not admitted guilt for the sixteen felony crimes he was convicted of.

  3. Joe was just served a subpoena to grill him about his involvement in the Perez cheating scandal.Joe being Joe will try to lie about knowing anything of course.So Joe is even lying about not being involved in any pending investigations,I mean, does he think no one knows about this??.. He just can’t help himself,one lie after another, constantly.

  4. This is so pathetic. He tried like hell to avoid a disposition on a lawsuit, we have not heard that the FBI has finished it investigation of Dunn and Perez and the Mayor’s possible involvement, the only reason he wants his license reinstated is to do pro bono work, blah, blah, blah.
    Let’s start with the full acknowledgement of everything that he did wrong, everything, that led to his being found guilty in the trial.
    He just keeps on lying and believing he can continuing to get away with it.
    I almost feel sorry for Joe. Almost…..

    1. He’ll go back to jail, get released again and run for Mayor 10 years from now and ……. Win again…… Mario should be 100 years old by then? #Corruptionatitsbest

  5. Isn’t it obvious to Bridgeport voters, as well as members of the Connecticut Bar who sit in judgement of his application to rejoin them that if Joe is truly dedicated to assist indigent individuals and families on a pro bono basis (FOR FREE) that doing everything honestly and legally in his power as Mayor is where he should labor for the rest of his days? And the voters shall be his oversight jury, indicating whether he is fully accountable for improvement in their situations? Who serves as jury for his pro bono future if he proves untrustworthy?

    Joe Sokolovic,a member of the BOE, understands the role of education in the future of City youth. He cites the basically lightweight positive contribution through inattention to improving things Ganim2 has fashioned. He speaks, tongue in cheek, I assume about the need beyond COVID-19 for education of City youth who have suffered a lost year.

    Recently I have been directing attention to Board and Commission Charter authorized responsibilities and duties, ignored, ill-served, and neglected to the current point that more than 90% of positions are vacant or served by folks whose terms expired as many as 12 years ago. Is this a form of active care for the ‘little people’, the ignored, or the indigent? The American public brown, black, and white observed the last 9 minutes in the life of George Floyd tick away. It is only on the City internet web site, but the deaths of our Fair Rent or Fair Housing Commissions have been on notice with out appointments, agendas or minutes of meetings for more than ten years. Not the same, I know but enough similar to cause more action than is generated by Ganim2 or his City political appointees. ( I am aware of more than two indigent homeless Bridgeport families looking for help today.) Where is the Ganim2 when it comes to answers or process today? Time will tell.

  6. I see you’re once again complaining about Mayor Ganim seeking to regain his law license and the overwhelming sentiment is that he doesn’t deserve it. Yet the voters of Bridgeport offered Mayor Ganim absolution when they voted him another term in office when everyone knew he was thief and an admitted liar. Don’t worry though people he only has about three more years in office until you get to vote for his lying thieving ass all over again! Soon come!

    1. @Donald
      The good difference is that the Testa DTC machine doesn’t control the State Courts in Harford that decide this licensing issue. Promises of city jobs, handouts, questionable absentee ballots can’t change the outcome.
      We who cannot vote in Bridgeport, despite paying taxes there, can address the court and voice our opinion about the application for reinstatement.
      It is a state license, not city. We all know how well Joe did when he wanted to trade city hall for the gov- ernor’s mansion.
      The electorate of Bridgeport may tolerate a felon who stole from them, but it doesn’t play in the other 168 municipalities in CT.

  7. Let’s look at the facts that’s in the Conn. Post, “Allowing an applicant to be readmitted to the practice of law following a conviction on 16 counts of racketeering, conspiracy, extortion, mail fraud, bribery and filing false income tax returns without any apology, expression of remorse or explanation, and with only a vague acceptance of an unspecified event, simply would set the bar for readmission too low in the state, and we are unwilling to do that,” the panel of Superior Court judges, Julia DiCocco Dewey, Elliot Solomon and Barbara Bellis, stated in a 36-page decision rejecting his application.”

    The Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance of Greater Bridgeport, the largest organization of black churches has its annual Emancipation Day on New Years Day is a holiday in Washington DC to mark the anniversary of the signing of the Compensated Emancipation Act, which president Abraham Lincoln signed. It was celebrated at Rev. Charlie Stallworh’s church when Joe Ganim gave his so call coming to Jesus speech. Ganim said, “I made some errors in judgment,” Ganim said. “I got involved in the wrong things and I broke the law. I breached the trust so many had placed in me. And for that, and all that we’ve lost, I’m truly sorry.” That’s not anapology, expression of remorse or explanation, where’s the atonement from Gamin for his crime to the voters of Bridgeport, Rev. Stallworth got played by Joe Ganim in using his church to give Ganim a forum in front of all of those black ministers who knew nothing about Joe Ganim would be given a forum to speak. What did those black ministers and the black community get from Joe Ganim after being elected for a second term as mayor and being a felon, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

  8. I think it’s time to give Joe his license back, forgiveness does not mean forgetting, nor does it mean condoning or excusing offenses he has paid ten-fold, it’s time to move on!

  9. What has he done to show remorse?
    Nothing. Not a damn thing. So no. N O no.
    Sorry Joe, the bar association wants remorseful ex-attorneys. You were not and are not remorseful. Next…..

    1. @Bob Walsh

      Please be aware the Bar Association has nothing to do with issuing law licenses and is not part of government.
      Licenses are issued by the CT Bar Examining Committee, a part of the State Superior Court.

      Membership in the Bar association of the State or County is not required of licensed attorneys in CT. The Bar Association is a cross between a networking organization and a lobbying group for the industry.

  10. You could start by volunteering, not during your Wouk hours, to help out with vaccinations for a month or to with nothing promised in return. That would be a start.

  11. A little off topic but on topic, did anyone notice that Ganim was a no show at the press conference with Bridgeport Hospital about their vaccination clinic at UB?
    He must be working at home this week.
    Can’t anybody beat this No-show Joe???

    1. Bob, something must be going that’s serious for Joe Gamin to miss a photo-op. Blumenthal, Ganim and Bradley never miss an opportunity to be in front of a camera just like photo queens do.

  12. Another off topic but….
    Aidee Nieves did it again.
    She has formed a group, committee, loosely defined organization, whatever. I have read about it on the CT Post website and as far as I can tell it has no name.
    It’s a task force but I don’t know exactly what it does. Aidee states Mayor Joe recently formalized it but as far as I know the only way you can formalize it is by City Charter or City Ordinance.
    Please Aidee, tells us which way it was formalized?

  13. It seems to be something Aidee wants complete control over. She apparently adds members when she feels like it and can remove members the same way.
    Her co-chair or vice chair is Scott Burns, fellow City Council member and Chairman of the Budget and Appropriations Committee but can’t even say what the budget is for the department. What???
    Scott says the budget documents say the
    getbudget is over $100 million but he thinks it’s more like $70 million. Lt Cotto of the Police Department says it more like $40 million. Really….
    This explains why the city is financially f’d up. The Co-Chair of the Budget Committee can’t even say what the amount is.
    What a sad state of affairs this city is in.

    1. Bob,
      As the CT Post revealed this morning, there are three widely different opinions about a critical set of financial facts reported. The facts are open, in one fashion or another to the public, i.e. the amount of money spent annually for Public Safety (Police) personnel and department. But the report indicates differences of $30 Million per year in spending. What’s the problem?

      Does one include the bonding amounts borrowed to be repaid over decades to currently fund at ever decreasing assumed interest rates, meaning a greater current liability? What about other benefits like lifetime medical benefits in a negotiated plan not available to most City residents, and not funded in the same fashion (different expenses for newer employees) that is currently leading to competitive disfavor with newer officers relative to other opportunities open to them? Where does one observe how “overtime hours” are fulfilled each month, and year to year, relative to monthly active personnel reporting by City Council or by public citizens? Where are capital funding debates or consideration reported on locally and are they included, i.e. leasing or purchase of vehicles? Does anyone continue to believe that Police overtime is a source of profit to the City Police Department?

      It is a huge waterfront to cover and CC members have only one vote per year to AYE or NAY what comes before them. Do they have enough info to come to understanding, agreement, and/or current decisions as to best practices for Bridgeport? Time will tell.

      1. John
        All you did was articulate the unknown. He is your council representative. Why don’t you ask him one-on-one rather and report back rather than babble to yourself?

        1. Several fiscal understandings were quoted. What is your understanding based on facts of the size of public spending on PD to add to the group? A variety of understandings may have been a genuine “unknown” to readers. That in itself may be news to readers.

          More to the point, since you accuse me of offering babbling which you obviously understand, thus making such common speak, you have so far provided 13 postings where you indicate your predilection for sniping, discrediting, and diminishing engagement on OIB. Is that more descriptive of your own “comments”? Time will tell.

  14. Bob, the Rules of the City Council allow the council president to appoint a special committee (ad hoc) for a specific assignment and report back to the city council. The mayor need not be consulted or advised.

  15. Tom
    So this committee is durational?
    How long does it last?
    She can change members on such a committee?
    Does it have to have a set time before it expires?
    Or can it go on ad Infinitum?
    Order such a committee have to have a give charge or can it look into anything?
    Your answer just begs further explanation.

  16. And what powers does this committee have?
    Don’t these issues have to be addressed before it has any meetings?
    Do it’s members have to be resident of the city?
    Where can I find the answers to these question?
    Doesn’t the council have to vote on its charges or can Aidee make up the rules as she goes along?
    Since it is not a council committee, is the prohibition against a council member serving on another committee still in force?
    Oh, and by the way, shouldn’t the Council President and Mayor address the expired term of standing committees and commissions before naming new committees?

  17. Tom
    Don’t tell me you are relying on Rule XVIII of the Council Rules as amended on July 6, 2020.
    That is strictly speaking about a Special Committee of the City Council. That no way involves no council members and furthermore does not allow for a Council President sitting as a member of a Special Committee.
    It you are referring to this section you are wrong. If you are referring to another section please cite that section.

  18. Bob,don’t sweat it,this commitee,like all the others formed in the past will get nothing done,just makes good headlines.A few months ago,didn’t Aidee “announce” a public safety commitee?,haven’t heard a thing about it since..expect the same here.

  19. Bob, if I took the city council or myself seriously I would try to answer your questions in detail.

    My recollection is that in 2006 or 2007 a council rule was cited for a ‘Special Committee on Charter Revision’ consisting of council members put forward at a council meeting as a resolution and approved by the city council.
    The specific charge was to determine what they could do by changing council rules, what required ordinance creation/amendment and what required charter change.
    The list was compiled, submitted to the full council and the committee was dissolved.

  20. Thank you Tom.
    That was a special committee of the City Council. This “committee” is of her choosing. She just added on a whim another member.
    You cannot do that.
    As far as I can tell there is no description of its duties.
    There is no qualifications of members.
    There are no rules.
    I have served under many Council Presidents and have never seen anything like this one.
    She is dangerous.

      1. Bingo Ron!…Joe lets Aidee form these commitees,but nothing changes unless Joe says so..basically a powerless council..Joe rushes through the CC meetings like he has a plane to catch,he just goes through the motions with them…

  21. “…Joe rushes through the CC meetings like he has a plane to catch,he just goes through the motions with them…”

    Not a bad metaphor for Joe’s CC-meeting style… But it always reminded me much more of an auctioneer’s style — especially when there’s an economic-development/permit application on the agenda…


Leave a Reply