Summary
The Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed the Shelby County Circuit Court’s denial of Keith Dessinger’s motion to recuse Judge W. Christopher Frulla under Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10B. The court held that Dessinger failed to include the required statement regarding improper purpose, failed to establish bias arising from an extrajudicial source, and provided insufficient evidence supporting his allegations of judicial bias. The case was remanded for further proceedings, with appellate costs taxed to Dessinger.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred in denying Dessinger's Rule 10B motion to recuse Judge Frulla.
- Whether allegations based on events occurring during the underlying litigation, unsupported claims of erroneous rulings, and unsubstantiated assertions of prejudicial remarks established a reasonable basis for questioning Judge Frulla's impartiality.
- Whether issues concerning other trial-court rulings were within the scope of the accelerated Rule 10B interlocutory appeal.
Holdings
- The motion did not establish a basis for recusal because it failed to include the mandatory affirmative statement that it was not presented for an improper purpose and failed to demonstrate a reasonable factual basis for questioning Judge Frulla's impartiality.
- Alleged errors in handling litigation, even if numerous or continuous, do not establish judicial bias without additional evidence, and allegations arising from events or observations during the litigation do not satisfy the extrajudicial-source requirement.
- The appellate court may review only the order denying the motion to recuse and may not review the correctness or merits of other trial-court rulings.
Key quotations
“Rulings of a trial judge, even if erroneous, numerous and continuous, do not, without more, justify disqualification.” (at 8)
“For these reasons, we affirm the trial court’s denial of Petitioner’s December 2, 2025 motion for recusal.” (at 9)
Factual background
Dessinger filed four motions to recuse in consolidated Shelby County proceedings. Three sought recusal of Judge Cedric D. Wooten, and the fourth, filed December 2, 2025, sought recusal of Judge W. Christopher Frulla after the cases had been transferred to and consolidated in Division III. Dessinger alleged that Judge Frulla made hostile remarks, mishandled an emergency motion, misapplied law and procedure, favored opposing counsel, misidentified the parties, and displayed a broader lack of neutrality. The motion was unsupported by the required affirmative statement regarding improper purpose and by evidence sufficient to establish a reasonable basis for questioning impartiality.
Procedural history
The Shelby County Circuit Court consolidated case numbers CT-2617-25, CT-2161-20, and CT-5185-24 and transferred the matters to Division III, where Judge Frulla presided. Dessinger filed a Rule 10B motion seeking Judge Frulla's recusal, alleging bias, improper rulings, prejudicial remarks, and other misconduct. The trial court denied the motion, and Dessinger timely pursued this accelerated interlocutory appeal. The Court of Appeals affirmed and remanded for further proceedings.
Remand instructions
The case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings; the costs of the appeal are taxed to Keith Dessinger.