Court Opinion

ID: 9786087
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 23:46:51.342458+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:41.488979
License: Public Domain

WATT, V.C.J.,
concurs in part, dissents in part:
I 1 I concur in that portion of the majority opinion which clarifies the procedural issues under a Rule 15 disqualification.
T2 I dissent to that portion of today's pronouncement (see $16) that would ipso facto disqualify a judge merely because one (or both) of the lawyers appearing before the court contributed to the judge's campaign.
T3 This case presents a prime example of an inherent problem in the election process for our trial court judges who must stand for reelection on a non-partisan ballot and seek campaign contributions to remain on the bench.
T4 As one who has in the past been involved in the reelection process, I feel sure that a large majority of the attorneys who practice in the 7th Judicial District (and all other districts across this State) will contribute to each candidate in any contested judicial race.
15 Today's pronouncement could have the practical effect of making every judge who stood for reelection in a contested race subject to automatic disqualification in a vast majority of the cases to come before that judge during his or her term of office.
T6 This would create a log jam in an already crowded docket, delay adjudications, and indeed deny due process to the litigants. Had the trial judge in this case recused himself based on the contribution issue alone (which this opinion will mandate in the future)-astute lawyers would thereafter get copies of campaign contribution forms from the State Ethics Commission and stand ready to invoke Rule 15 in all future cases where opposing counsel was a campaign contributor and thereby create a "forum shopping process" which would only cause further delay and which makes the "cure" as bad as the "condition", it is intended to treat.
T7 Whether the current method of electing our trial court judges remains or is modified is up to the citizens of this State. The inherent problem of campaign contributions while not one which the candidate for judicial office has created but will remain as long as the current system exists and will be excer-bated by today's pronouncement.
18 Here, the trial judge felt that he could proceed and be impartial and the chief judge agreed.
T9 Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from that part of today's holding which would require the trial court's disqualification.