TN Judge Not Disqualified By Lawyer’s Campaign Contribution

Tennessee law case summary on judicial recusal in divorce and family law from the Court of Appeals.

In Re Gabriel V.  – Tennessee judicial recusal

The father filed this petition to establish custody, child support, and visitation in Davidson County, Tennessee, in 2013.  The juvenile court magistrate awarded the parties joint custody and parenting time until the child started school.  Dissatisfied with this outcome, the mother hired a new lawyer and asked the juvenile court judge to reconsider.  In 2014, the court held a hearing and awarded the mother significantly more parenting time than the father.  The father responded by asking for a new trial and for the judge’s recusal.  The father alleged that the judge was engaged in an election campaign at the time, and that the mother’s lawyer was a public supporter of the judge’s bid for re-election.  The trial judge denied this motion, and the father brought a recusal appeal to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals first noted that such appeals are normally addressed summarily, and went on to decide the case without further briefing by the parties.  It noted that Tennessee law ensures that all litigants are entitled to the “cold neutrality” of the judge in the case.

However, the court noted that a campaign contribution to or support of a judge’s re-election campaign, by itself, does not automatically warrant recusal.  In deciding such a case, it was necessary to look at other issues, such as the amount and timing of the contribution compared with the total support, and the issues in the particular case.  The appeals court noted that a leadership role in a campaign might warrant recusal.

In this case, the Court of Appeals described the contributions as modest.  The lawyer had donated $200 to the judge’s campaign, out of a total of about $80,000.  The lawyer was listed in campaign literature as a “friend” of the judge, but about 150 other names were also listed as friends.

The lawyer did not hold any leadership role in the campaign, and did not attend any campaign meetings.

The Court of Appeals thus held that recusal was not warranted in this case, and affirmed the lower court’s judgment.

No. M2014-01298-COA-T10B-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 31, 2014).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

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