Difference between revisions of "Faux Process And Rubber-Stamped Orders"
no edit summary
(username removed) |
(username removed) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In 2019, I represented a mother in Muskogee County fighting for custody of her 5-year-old son. The mother had primary custody at the time and an intermittent hearing was held to potentially appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to the case. That hearing was not regarding the change of custody and the Muskogee County Superior Court did not change custody that day. | In 2019, I represented a mother in Muskogee County fighting for custody of her 5-year-old son. The mother had primary custody at the time and an intermittent hearing was held to potentially appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to the case. That hearing was not regarding the change of custody and the Muskogee County Superior Court did not change custody that day. The judge asked the father’s attorney to draft an order appointing the Guardian Ad Litem. The opposing counsel drafted the “proposed” order for the judge to review. In the proposed order, however, the opposing attorney inserted a clause that changed full custody from the mother to the father. The judge signed the order without scrutiny and, without notice or a hearing on the matter, the mother lost primary custody of her son. It took over a year for the mother to get primary custody of her son back. | ||
So what happened here? How could a judge simply sign parental rights away at the drop of a hat, without notice or a hearing? This is what I call “faux process” (contra to “due process”) and what many attorneys refer to as a “rubber-stamped” order. The formula for this injustice is as follows:<br> | So what happened here? How could a judge simply sign parental rights away at the drop of a hat, without notice or a hearing? This is what I call “faux process” (contra to “due process”) and what many attorneys refer to as a “rubber-stamped” order. The formula for this injustice is as follows:<br> | ||
[[File:Blind Judge.jpeg|left|200px|Faux Process]] | [[File:Blind Judge.jpeg|left|200px|Faux Process]] | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
(1) | (1) A judge sets a hearing on a specific matter.<br> | ||
(2) Then at the hearing, the judge makes | (2) Then at the hearing, the judge makes an oral ruling in open court and tells the attorney for the "prevailing party" to draft a proposed order for the judge to sign.<br> | ||
(3) The drafting attorney then inserts wording awarding additional remedies that were not part of the judge's | (3) The drafting attorney then inserts wording awarding additional remedies that were not part of the judge's oral ruling nor within the scope of the matter actually heard.<br> | ||
(4) | (4) The judge then signs the order without scrutiny, thus awarding the drafting party the remedies improperly inserted into the proposed order by the prevailing party's attorney.<br> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
Now, obviously the Muscogee County judge described above erred by signing an order that the judge did not | Now, obviously the Muscogee County judge described in my story above erred by signing an order that the judge did not read. But why did this happen? A summary list of potential causes sheds some light on the phenomenon. In Cobb County, State Court judges are paid ___________________ annually and they keep their office position unless they retire or lose in an election. Theoretically, they can be removed from office through a disqualification process initiated by the Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC). However, the JQC will generally not scrutinize a judge's signed order so long as a hearing was conducted and the order on its face does not show clear impropriety. That being said, the "rubber-stamped" order flies under the radar and the rubber-stamping judge remains free of JQC prosecution. Second, judges are subject to many outside influences that are not reflected on a court's record. For example, judges are allowed to accept campaign donations from local attorneys and, under the current ethics code applicable in Georgia, the judges are not required to disclose their donations to the parties in court. Another not so commonly advertised influence over a judge's decision is caused by the judge's own staff members. A judge's staff attorney | ||
That case in Muscogee County was not the first time I witnessed the entering of a rubber-stamped order, nor was it the last. In fact, my first recollection of such injustice occurred at the hands of Judge Carl W. Bowers, and my most recent experience was at the hands of Judge G. Grant Brantley. While I sincerely want to believe that these were honest mistakes, rare flukes caused by the coincidental alignment of the planets, mere cursory research into the personal backgrounds and experience of these two judges shows otherwise. | That case in Muscogee County was not the first time I witnessed the entering of a rubber-stamped order, nor was it the last. In fact, my first recollection of such injustice occurred at the hands of Judge Carl W. Bowers, and my most recent experience was at the hands of Judge G. Grant Brantley. While I sincerely want to believe that these were honest mistakes, rare flukes caused by the coincidental alignment of the planets, mere cursory research into the personal backgrounds and experience of these two judges shows otherwise. | ||
(username removed)