Tennessee case abstract on recusal in divorce.
Margaret Kathryn Younger v. Larry Joe Younger
Shelby County Courthouse
The spouse on this Shelby County, Tennessee, case filed for divorce after 35 years of marriage. She challenged the validity of the antenuptial settlement signed the day earlier than the wedding, and the query of the validity was heard at a listening to in July, 2022 earlier than Choose James F. Russell.
Throughout this spouse’s testimony, she was testifying concerning a toddler custody petition filed by her first husband, shortly after this marriage. Choose Russell realized that he had been a accomplice within the legislation agency which represented the primary husband. Choose Russell suggested the attorneys of those info, and informed them that his involvement in that case would haven’t any impact on his impartiality. The spouse’s legal professional requested if the choose had any recollection of the case 37 years in the past, to which he replied, “not a lot.”
After a break, the husband’s legal professional requested that the choose recuse himself, on the grounds that the spouse would possibly later complain. The spouse, nonetheless, opposed recusal. The court docket requested the spouse to waive any potential battle, which she did. Nonetheless, Choose Russell determined to recuse himself.
The spouse’s legal professional sought accelerated evaluate of the choose’s choice beneath a Supreme Court docket rule governing recusal instances. The legal professional argued that the choose had an obligation to listen to the case.
The appeals court docket first famous that the foundations of judicial conduct require judges to listen to instances until disqualified by some legislation. It conceded {that a} recusal can, certainly, burden the events to a case.
However the appeals court docket identified that the rule cited by the husband utilized solely to instances the place the trial choose refused to recuse himself. Appeals of a choose’s choice to recuse himself, like all different appeals, should wait till a last judgment.
The spouse anticipated this argument, and likewise requested evaluate beneath a typical legislation writ of certiorari. However the appeals court docket held that this was not the right process to be adopted. There are different provisions which can be utilized for interlocutory appeals, and since these weren’t adopted, the attraction was not correct.
For these causes, the Court docket of Appeals dismissed the attraction. The court docket’s opinion was authored by Choose W. Neal McBrayer, and it was joined by Judges J. Steven Stafford and Thomas R. Frierson II.
No. W2022-01031-COA-T10B-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 19, 2022).
See unique opinion for actual language. Authorized citations omitted.
To study extra, see The Tennessee Divorce Course of: How Divorces Work Begin to End.
