Does a party’s complaint against the judge or the judge’s explanation in court require recusal?

Plain-English summary

A judge presiding over a civil action learned that a party had filed a complaint against the judge with the Judicial Inquiry Commission. The Commission said awareness of the complaint alone did not require recusal, but the judge had to recuse if it generated personal bias or prejudice against the party.

The party also sought recusal over comments that allegedly promoted the defendants’ counterclaim. The judge said the remarks explained potential liability to a self-represented party. On the facts provided, the Commission found no disqualifying basis in those comments.

The opinion cited the distinction between bias from an outside source and comments made in a proceeding. It quoted a treatise explaining that courtroom remarks ordinarily do not show disqualifying bias while the judge remains open to the evidence.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992, after the Alabama Supreme Court's 1975 adoption of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. Subsequent amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Canons and linked opinion before relying on its conclusions.

Common questions

Q: Does a party’s Commission complaint by itself disqualify the judge?

A: No. The opinion says awareness of the complaint alone does not require recusal.

Q: What if the complaint causes personal bias?

A: Canon 3C(1)(a) requires the judge to disqualify if personal bias or prejudice develops.

Q: Did the described explanation to the self-represented party require recusal?

A: No. The Commission found no basis for disqualification in those remarks on the stated facts.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Canon 3C(1)(a) to personal bias and uses the distinction between outside-source bias and courtroom remarks to assess the judge’s explanation.

Citations and references

Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

• Canon 3C(1)(a)

Cases:

• McWhorter v. City Of Birmingham, 906 F.2d 674, 678 (11th Cir. 1990): outside-source bias.

Other opinions cited:

• Alabama JIC Opinions 90-391 and 87-292: party complaints against a judge.

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 92-449: Contesting a Judge’s Order

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 92-447
• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

92-447
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
August 21, 1992
This is in response to your request for an advisory opinion from the Judicial Inquiry Commission. Your question involves a civil action over which you are presently presiding in which the plaintiff has filed a complaint against you before the Judicial Inquiry Commission. It is well-settled that a judge is not disqualified from sitting in a proceeding merely because the judge has been made aware that one of the parties has filed a complaint against the judge with the Judicial Inquiry Commission. Advisory Opinions 90-391, 87-

292. However, a judge must disqualify himself if the judge determines that the filing of
     the complaint has generated a personal bias or prejudice in the judge against the party. Canon 3C(l)(a). Your second question involves a motion to recuse filed by the plaintiff alleging that you “promoted” a counterclaim by the defendants by your remarks during the course of the proceedings. In a response to the motion to recuse, you indicate that the plaintiff is representing herself, is not an attorney, and that your comments were intended as an explanation of the plaintiff’s potential for liability. “The bias necessary to disqualify a judge should arise from an extrajudicial source, resulting in an opinion on the merits based on something other than what the judge learned from participating in the case.” L. Abramson, Judicial Disqualification Under Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct 24 (American Judicature Society, 2nd ed. 1992) (emphasis in original). See also McWhorter v. City Of Birmingham, 906 F.2d 674, 678 (11th Cir. 1990). “Remarks and comments made by a judge in the context of court proceedings ordinarily will not be considered indicative of improper bias or prejudice unless they go so far as to show that the judge has closed his or her mind about a case before all of the evidence has been presented ... At an rate, so long as a judge remains open-minded enough to refrain from finally deciding a case until all of the evidence has been presented, remarks made by the judge during the course of the proceedings will not be considered as indicative of disqualifying bias or prejudice.” Judicial Disqualification at 107. Based on the information you have provided this Commission, your comments in explanation of the plaintiff’s potential for liability do not constitute a basis for your disqualification. The Commission has approved this opinion. Please contact me if you have any questions about this or any other matter.