Edison Judge Faces Misconduct Charges Over Drunk-Driving Crash and False Statements

Judge Gary M. Price faces allegations of misconduct stemming from a 2024 motor vehicle accident involving alcohol and subsequent misrepresentations to authorities and investigators.

The Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC) has filed an amended formal complaint against Gary M. Price, a part-time municipal court judge in Edison Township, citing allegations of misconduct related to a July 2024 motor vehicle accident and his subsequent conduct during the investigation.

According to the complaint, Price, who has been a member of the New Jersey Bar since 1988, was involved in a single-vehicle crash in South Plainfield on July 5, 2024. Police responded to the scene after an automated 9-1-1 call from his vehicle’s OnStar system. Officers reported finding Price’s vehicle against a construction barrier, and they observed blood on his clothing, bloodshot eyes, and an odor of alcohol on his breath.

Price told officers he had consumed one martini earlier that day at a restaurant in Edison. He was transported to a hospital, where a blood test indicated a blood alcohol concentration of 0.086 percent—slightly above the state’s legal limit of 0.08 percent. While charges for driving while intoxicated (DWI) and failure to maintain lane were ultimately dismissed, Price pleaded guilty to reckless driving and paid the minimum fine. He voluntarily installed an ignition interlock device in his vehicle for three months.

The ACJC alleges that Price repeatedly misrepresented to police, the committee, and during sworn testimony the amount of alcohol he had consumed before the crash. Itemized receipts from the restaurant where he dined reportedly showed he ordered multiple alcoholic beverages. The complaint further alleges that Price and his counsel failed to promptly provide requested documentation to investigators, including a receipt for his July 5 order.

The amended complaint charges Price with violating several provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct, including failing to maintain high standards of conduct, respect and comply with the law, and promote public confidence in the judiciary.

The case is proceeding under Rule 2:15 of the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey. The ACJC has not yet announced when a formal hearing will take place.