Opinion ID: 2361145
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Role of Presiding Judge

Text: Although she does not explain what relief she seeks, Ellen claims that the trial judge erred by continuing to preside over this matter after his term in family court ended. According to Ellen, she was prejudiced by the judge's continuing role in this case because of his hostility toward her. This claim borders on the frivolous. Our rules plainly state, and we have previously recognized, that the expiration of a term does not affect a judge's power over a case that has been pending before the judge. DeGrace, 147 Vt. at 469, 520 A.2d at 989; see V.R.C.P. 6(c) (expiration of term of court in no way affects power of court to do any act or take any proceeding in any civil proceeding that has been pending before it). Moreover, our review of the record does not reveal any bias or prejudice on the part of the judge. Indeed, the judge exhibited remarkable patience with the attorneys and the parties during these protracted and vehemently disputed divorce proceedings. The parental rights and responsibilities order is reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. In all other respects, the decision below is affirmed.