A complaint about 7 judges alleges that their ruling in the matter that concerned the complainant’s son were based on criminal acts by the opposing parties’ counsel, and that the judges ignored all references to those crimes.

webid-20150000

A complaint about 7 judges alleges that their ruling in the matter that concerned the complainant’s son were based on criminal acts by the opposing parties’ counsel, and that the judges ignored all references to those crimes. The complainant also alleged that the judges failed to promote equal justice for his son as a self-represented litigant, to refer him to other appropriate sources of information, to advise him and to assist him.

The complainant was advised that a judge must ensure that every party has an opportunity to present their case; however, it does not include offering legal advice or treating one party differently than another. The complainant was advised that the Council has no authority to review a judicial decision for the purpose of determining its correctness, nor can the Council change or rescind a judgment. Where a litigant disagrees with a finding or a decision, the appropriate recourse lies with the appeal level. The matter was closed.

Back