Appalachian Regional Healthcare, Inc. v. Coleman

Summary

The Supreme Court of Kentucky considered whether a writ of prohibition should issue to prevent a circuit judge who had recused himself from reconsidering the recusal order and taking further discretionary action in the underlying medical-negligence case. The court held that the recused judge lacked jurisdiction to reconsider his recusal absent affirmative evidence that the disqualifying conflict no longer existed, and that the Court of Appeals had applied the wrong writ standard. The decision reversed and remanded for entry of a writ of prohibition.

Holdings

1. When a lower court is proceeding or is about to proceed outside its jurisdiction, a writ of prohibition may be available upon a showing that there is no remedy through an application to an intermediate court; the existence of an adequate remedy by appeal does not preclude the writ in this jurisdictional class of cases.
2. A judge who has properly recused himself loses discretionary jurisdiction over the case and may not resume substantive participation absent affirmative evidence that the disqualifying conflict no longer exists and no special judge has been appointed.
3. The writ of prohibition was appropriate because Judge Coleman was about to act outside his jurisdiction by hearing the motion to reconsider his recusal order, and the petition had been initiated in the proper court.

Questions Presented

1. What standard governs a petition for a writ of prohibition when the lower court is alleged to be acting outside its jurisdiction?
2. Whether a trial judge who has properly recused himself retains jurisdiction to hear and decide a motion seeking reconsideration of the recusal order.
3. Whether the Court of Appeals erred by denying the writ on the ground that an adequate remedy by appeal was available.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded