GAL Having Been Law Clerk Not Bias for Judicial Recusal

Shelby County Courthouse

Tennessee case summary on judicial recusal.

Catrice Thomas Dye v. Willie B. Dye, Jr.

The parties in this Shelby County, Tennessee, case were divorced in 2019.  Less than a month after the final decree was entered, the mother filed a petition to amend the judgment based upon new evidence.  She also requested that the 16-year-old daughter be allowed to testify.  The daughter had testified previously in chambers, and parenting time was split equally between the parents.  But the mother alleged that this was based upon fear of what the father may do if she didn’t want to live with him.  The mother asserted that the daughter actually wanted to spend the majority of her time with the mother.

The trial court appointed a guardian ad litem, an attorney.  The order specified that the guardian ad litem was not a special master, but that she should investigate and present her findings as she would in any case in which she was serving as attorney.

The guardian ad litem analyzed the factors in the Tennessee statutes, and concluded that there was no reason not to have equal parenting time, other than the mother’s and daughter’s preference.  The mother moved to strike the report on the grounds that the guardian ad litem was acting more as a special master, which she had been instructed not to do.

The mother also filed a motion to have the trial judge, Chancellor JoDae L. Jenkins, recused from the case.  This motion was based on the fact that the guardian ad litem had previously served as a law clerk for Chancellor Jenkins.  She alleged that this was improper, and that since the chancellor had already read the improper report, this was grounds for recusal.  The motion was denied, and the mother brought an immediate appeal to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court that there was no evidence of bias.  The guardian ad litem had served as a clerk in unrelated cases, and had no connection with this particular case or parties before being assigned.  Both courts cited a 2012 case with similar facts and held that it was the appropriate precedent to apply.  And even though the guardian ad litem entitled one of her filings a “report,” the appeals court agreed that it was an argument very similar to what an attorney would file in any other case.  Therefore, it did not improperly taint the trial judge who read it.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the order denying recusal and remanded the case for further proceedings.

No. W2019-02011-COA-T10B-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 18,  2019).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see The Tennessee Divorce Process: How Divorces Work Start to Finish.