TN Divorce Judge Must Be Recused After Investigation of Leaked Pleading

Tennessee case summary on judicial recusal in divorce.

The husband and wife in this Davidson County, Tennessee, case were married in 2001. The wife, who was 21 years old, had never been married. The husband, 45, had been married three times previously. About a week before the marriage, the parties entered into an antenuptial agreement regarding the distribution of their property in case of divorce.

In 2017, the husband filed for divorce based upon irreconcilable differences. Since the parties had one minor child, the husband filed a proposed parenting plan.

After an attempt at reconciliation, the wife also asked for a divorce based upon inappropriate marital conduct. She also argued that the antenuptial agreement was invalid.

There were various pretrial motions, and the case came closer to trial. The filings included the wife’s pretrial brief, which eventually garnered media attention on social media and in publications in Nashville. The trial judge remarked that if the wife or anyone on her behalf had provided the brief to the media, “that’s going to go a long way in my deciding the relationship of the child.” The judge then asked everyone in the courtroom, under oath, if they leaked it or had anything to do with the leak.

The wife’s attorney objected, but admitted that he had been contacted by someone at “Scoop: Nashville,” and advised the caller that the document had been filed with the court.

The case was set for trial, and the morning of trial, the wife filed a motion to disqualify the trial judge on the grounds that his impartiality had been called into question due to the independent investigation into the leak.

The trial court denied the motion, and the wife brought a recusal appeal to the Tennessee Court of Appeals. That court first noted that a fair trial before an impartial tribunal is a fundamental constitutional right.

The appeals court agreed with the wife that there was an appearance of bias or prejudice. In particular, the appeals court focused on a rule of judicial conduct regarding a judge’s power to undertake an investigation. For example, it noted that the trial judge had consulted Twitter posts of the document and drawn conclusions based upon the posting.

Ultimately, the Court of Appeals held that the investigation was improper, and it supported the wife’s motion for recusal. For these reasons, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the lower court’s ruling. Costs of appeal were assessed against the husband.

No. M2018-01651-COA-T10B-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 19, 2018).

See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.

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