TN Wife Can’t Force Judge Off Case, Despite Claims of Bias

Tennessee case summary on judicial recusal and attorney withdrawal with in divorce.

Darren Dwayne Bracey v. Kimberly Ann Roberts Bracey

The husband and wife in this Tennessee case were married in 1999.  They separated in 2008, and a divorce action was filed in Sumner County.  While that case was pending, they reconciled and moved to Robertson County.  But the reconciliation did not last, and in 2013, the father filed for divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences, inappropriate marital conduct, abuse of narcotic drugs, adultery, and failure to support.

After contentious proceedings, which included the wife’s damaging the marital residence, a hearing date was set.  The day of the scheduled hearing, her attorney appeared in court and asserted that he had to withdraw because of a conflict of interest.  The wife appeared at the hearing without an attorney.  She alleged that the court’s prior rulings had been biased, and that the judge should be recused.  The court refused, since it stated that it would give the wife “a new opportunity to continue her practice of dishonesty or misrepresentation.”  The court also denied the wife’s motion to delay the hearing until she got her money together and hired a new attorney.  The court went ahead with the hearing, granted the husband the divorce, and made rulings as to property division.  Dissatisfied with those rulings, the wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

She first argued that the trial court had been biased against her and should have recused itself.  The appeals court noted that litigants have the right to have their cases heard by fair and impartial judges.  But the appeals court quickly dismissed the argument, since the court rules require that recusal motions me made in writing, which the wife had not done.  She argued that she should be forgiven for this error, since she was not represented by an attorney when she made the motion.  But the Court of Appeals pointed out that she had been represented by a lawyer at relevant times in the proceeding.  Therefore, it affirmed the denial of the recusal motion.

The wife also argued that her attorney should not have been allowed to withdraw.  The wife’s attorney had another client, and on one occasion, the husband was accompanying that client to court in an unrelated matter.  The wife was following them and taking a video, which the husband believed would be used to allege adultery.  The attorney believed that he might need to cross-examine his own client if the wife made those allegations.

The wife argued that the lawyer should have withdrawn from the other case, and not from hers.  But the appeals court agreed that the lower court had acted properly.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court.  It also found that the wife’s appeal was frivolous, and awarded the husband costs and fees.

No. M2014-01865-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 26, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Tennessee Divorce Laws.