A Georgia judge must step aside when a reasonable outsider would question the judge’s impartiality. Your own view of the judge is not the measure.
The Standard
Uniform Superior Court Rule 25.3 directs the court to be guided by Rule 2.11 of the Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct. As the Court of Appeals described that rule in Bass v. Medy, 358 Ga. App. 827 (2021), judges “shall disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” including when “the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer.”
Whose Perception Counts
Bass explains the phrase that decides most of these motions. “[I]mpartiality might reasonably be questioned” means “a reasonable perception, of lack of impartiality by the judge, held by a fair minded and impartial person based upon objective fact or reasonable inference; it is not based upon the perception of either interested parties or their lawyer-advocates.”
The bias also has to be serious. It must be “of such a nature and intensity to prevent the complaining party from obtaining a trial uninfluenced by the court’s prejudgment.”
A Connection Is Not Enough
In Hill v. Hill, 360 Ga. App. 530 (2021), a former husband moved to recuse an entire judicial circuit from his ex-wife’s contempt action because one of her attorneys also served as a part-time magistrate in a county within that circuit.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial. Nothing showed that the attorney had exercised any jurisdiction over the case or had a special relationship with the judge, so the arrangement did not create “in reasonable minds a perception that the judge’s ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired.”
Contact Us
This post is a quick overview of the law and is not intended as legal advice. Please feel free to contact our office for a consultation if you have questions about this or any other legal aspects regarding your case!