Robert Anthony Caleb Wise v. Lindsay Marie Snapp Wise

Summary

The Tennessee Court of Appeals reviewed a Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10B interlocutory appeal from the denial of Lindsay Marie Snapp Wise’s motion to recuse the trial judge in a divorce and child-custody proceeding. The court held that the judge’s personal anecdote, alleged inconsistent rulings, and errors in the initial recusal order did not provide an objective basis to question the judge’s impartiality, affirmed the trial court, and remanded.

Holdings

1. A Rule 10B appeal is limited to determining whether the trial court erred in denying recusal; the appellate court may not review the correctness or merits of the trial court's other rulings.
2. Recusal is required when a person of ordinary prudence in the judge's position, knowing all facts known to the judge, would find a reasonable basis for questioning the judge's impartiality.
3. The trial judge's comments about his personal experience with a child injury, although not best practice, did not provide an objective basis to question his impartiality when considered in the context of the entire record.
4. Adverse, numerous, or allegedly erroneous rulings do not, without more, justify recusal, and adverse rulings in a prior proceeding do not provide a basis for recusal.
5. The petitioner failed to establish that the trial judge's conduct demonstrated bias so pervasive that it denied her a fair trial or otherwise supplied an objective basis for questioning impartiality.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court erred in denying the petitioner's motion to recuse under Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10B.
2. Whether the trial judge's personal anecdote and other comments during the emergency-motion hearing gave a reasonable person a basis to question the judge's impartiality.
3. Whether the trial court's allegedly inconsistent rulings, adverse rulings, and corrected recusal order required recusal.

Disposition

affirmed