Difference between revisions of "Georgia Ethics Code Does Not Apply To Fulton Judges"

(username removed)
Tags: Mobile web edit Mobile edit
(username removed)
Tags: Mobile web edit Mobile edit
Line 85: Line 85:
1. On '''September 13, 2022''', counsel for Jackson filed a ''Demand for Jury Trial'' into the eviction case with Paramount.
1. On '''September 13, 2022''', counsel for Jackson filed a ''Demand for Jury Trial'' into the eviction case with Paramount.


2. On October 21, 2022, Judge Leftridge's staff attorney informed the parties through email that there would not be a court reporter for the jury trial scheduled to take place on October 25, 2022 and that the Court would not continue the case even if the parties could not secure their own court reporter. On '''October 24, 2022''', Jackson filed for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy resulting in an automatic stay of the eviction case.
2. On October 21, 2022, Judge Leftridge's staff attorney informed the parties through email that there would not be a court reporter for the jury trial scheduled to take place on October 25, 2022 and that the Court would not delay the trial even if the parties could not secure their own court reporter. On '''October 24, 2022''', Jackson filed for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy resulting in an automatic stay of the eviction case.


3. After the Bankruptcy stay, Paramount filed a motion for an immediate writ of possession ("eviction") and for the release of all funds that were in the Registry of the Court, just over $115,000.00 without any evidence as to how much Paramount was entitled to and how much of it was in dispute. Judge Leftridge's staff attorney informed the parties on December 21, 2022 at 11:03 AM that the Court was going to issue an order on Paramount's motion, which had only been filed the evening before, December 20, 2022. On '''December 22, 2022''', the parties were served an order signed by Judge Leftridge for an immediate writ of possession against Jackson, the release of more than $115,000 in the Registry to Paramount and ordering Jackson to pay $30,000.00 more into the Registry of the Court no later than December 31, 2022. Counsel for Jackson had emailed the Judge's staff attorney earlier that morning only to receive an auto-reply stating that she was on vacation.
3. After the Bankruptcy stay was lifted, Paramount filed a motion for an immediate writ of possession ("eviction") and for the release of all funds that were in the Registry of the Court, which was estimated to be just over $115,000. Judge Leftridge's staff attorney informed the parties on December 21, 2022 at 11:03 AM that the Court was going to issue an order on Paramount's motion, which had only been filed the evening before, December 20, 2022. On '''December 22, 2022''', the parties were served an order signed by Judge Leftridge for an immediate writ of possession against Jackson, the release of the more than $115,000 held in the Registry to Paramount and ordering Jackson to pay $30,000.00 more into the Registry of the Court no later than December 31, 2022. Counsel for Jackson had emailed the Judge's staff attorney earlier that morning only to receive an auto-reply stating that she was on vacation.


4. On December 28, 2022, Jackson filed a motion to recuse Judge Leftridge from the eviction case. Judge Leftridge signed a reassignment order on '''January 6, 2023''' in light of Jackson's recusal motion and the motion to recuse was subsequently assigned to Judge Richardson.
4. On December 28, 2022, Jackson filed a motion to recuse Judge Leftridge from the eviction case. Judge Leftridge signed a reassignment order on '''January 6, 2023''' in light of Jackson's recusal motion and the motion to recuse was subsequently assigned to Judge Richardson.


5. The writ of possession ordering that Jackson be evicted from the Property did not include his fiance and children. However, on '''January 12, 2023''', the Fulton County Sheriff Deputies used that writ of possession to remove everyone from the Property, including Jackson's fiance and children.
5. The writ of possession ordering that Jackson be evicted from the Property did not include his fiance and children. However, on '''January 12, 2023''', the Fulton County Sheriff Deputies used that writ of possession to remove everyone from the Property including Jackson's fiance and children.


6. On January 31, 2023, Jackson filed a ''Petition to Quiet Title and Breach of Contract'' against the McCrackens, which required the assigned judge to appoint a special master. That case was assigned to Judge Richardson but Judge Richardson did not appoint a special master.  
6. On January 31, 2023, Jackson filed a ''Petition to Quiet Title and Breach of Contract'' against the McCrackens, which required the assigned judge to appoint a special master. That case was assigned to Judge Richardson but Judge Richardson did not appoint a special master.  


7. On '''February 12, 2023''', Judge Richardson voluntarily recused herself from the Quiet Title case but did NOT recuse herself from the eviction case. The Quiet Title case was re-assigned to Judge Krause upon Judge Richardson's recusal.  
7. On '''February 13, 2023''', Judge Richardson voluntarily recused herself from the Quiet Title case but did NOT recuse herself from the eviction case. The Quiet Title case was re-assigned to Judge Krause upon Judge Richardson's recusal.  


8. Judge Krause never appointed a special master in the Quiet Title action.
8. Judge Krause never appointed a special master in the Quiet Title action.


9. On '''February 17, 2023''', Judge Richardson denied all three pending motions to recuse Judge Leftridge and the eviction case was then assigned back to Judge Leftridge. Judge Krause then transferred the Quiet Title action to Judge Leftridge.  
9. On '''February 17, 2023''', Judge Richardson denied all three pending motions to recuse Judge Leftridge and the eviction case was then assigned back to Judge Leftridge. Judge Krause then transferred the Quiet Title action to Judge Leftridge on February 24, 2023.


10. On '''March 2, 2023''', Jackson's counsel motioned to recuse Judge Leftridge from the Quiet Title action. Before Judge Leftridge signed the reassignment order as required by law, she set a hearing on the McCrackens' motion trying to stay the appointment of a special master. That hearing was set to take place on '''March 10, 2023''' before the Honorable Judge Dempsey. However, on March 9, 2023, the Court canceled that hearing in light of the pending resusal motion against Judge Leftridge.
10. On '''March 2, 2023''', Jackson's counsel motioned to recuse Judge Leftridge from the Quiet Title action. Before Judge Leftridge signed the reassignment order as required by law, she set a hearing on the McCrackens' motion trying to stay the appointment of a special master. That hearing was set to take place on '''March 10, 2023''' before the Honorable Judge Alford Dempsey. However, on March 9, 2023, the Court canceled that hearing in light of the pending resusal motion against Judge Leftridge.


11. On '''March 10, 2023''', Judge Ingram denied Jackson's motion to recuse Judge Leftridge from the Quiet Title action and the case was assigned back to Judge Leftridge.
11. On '''March 10, 2023''', Judge Ingram denied Jackson's motion to recuse Judge Leftridge from the Quiet Title action and the case was assigned back to Judge Leftridge.
Line 109: Line 109:
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Based on the above, the actions (or inactions) taken (or not taken) by the Fulton County Superior Court judges and their subordinates are consistent with gaining and maintaining the most control over the outcome of the case, which is inconsistent with their duty to remain neutral and impartial. If they were neutral and impartial, they would have no interest in controlling the narrative--but they are certainly fighting hard to, VERY hard.
Based on the above, the actions (or inactions) taken (or not taken) by the Fulton County Superior Court judges and their subordinates are consistent with gaining and maintaining the most control over the outcome of the case, which is inconsistent with their duty to remain neutral and impartial. If they were neutral and impartial, they would have no interest in preventing a special master from taking jurisdiction over the matter. But they are certainly fighting hard to keep a special master from reviewing the case, VERY hard.


=History Repeats Itself=
=History Repeats Itself=
(username removed)