[OK] [OK] Is there judicial bias in my custody case?
Hello, I have a question which would require your analysis of events that happened at a family law status conference. I have several attorneys giving differing opinions, and I would like to seek a third.
28
12
Solved
It's completely understandable why you're deeply concerned about the judge’s comment in your family law case. The situation raises serious questions about fairness, judicial ethics, and your constitutional right to due process. When a judge makes a statement like “You are the reason this case is high conflict”—especially without having presided over hearings or reviewed the facts—it’s more than just troubling. It suggests the judge may have formed an opinion prematurely, possibly aligning with the other party’s narrative before hearing both sides.
Judges are held to high standards of neutrality. They’re expected not only to be impartial, but also to avoid even the appearance of bias. Oklahoma’s judicial conduct rules, like those in other states, are clear on this. Judges must carry out their duties without prejudice and should step aside from a case when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. That’s not just about actual bias—even the perception of bias can be enough to justify recusal.
In your case, the judge made a definitive and damaging statement early on, despite not having reviewed the full record or considered any evidence. That’s a red flag. It gives the impression that the judge may have already taken sides, which is especially dangerous in custody disputes, where impartiality is absolutely essential. This concern becomes even more serious when future hearings involve contempt or enforcement issues—proceedings that require the highest level of fairness because they can carry real consequences.
0
Full Conversation
Hello, I have a question which would require your analysis of events that happened at a family law status conference. I have several attorneys giving differing opinions, and I would like to seek a third.
Lexi, Chatbot
I understand you’re seeking a third opinion on events from a family law status conference. Can you provide a brief overview of what occurred during the conference?
This is a four-year-long custody case involving multiple allegations of noncompliance with court-ordered visitation. Throughout the history of the case, the prior judge conducted multiple hearings, including on motions to enforce and for contempt, and admonished the Respondent in open court for repeatedly denying visitation and violating orders.
In contrast, the current judge was newly assigned to the case and has not presided over any evidentiary hearings or finalized any motions relating to the underlying facts. At the recent status conference—without having heard evidence or reviewed the full record—the judge turned to me and stated:
“You are the reason this case is high conflict.”
I responded calmly, asking, “Can you tell me more?” The judge offered no clarification or elaboration.
What concerns me is that this comment seems to reflect prejudgment, not based on evidence, but rather an adoption of the Respondent’s narrative—despite a long procedural record to the contrary. It also occurred in a context where the judge is expected to preside over substantive hearings going forward, including on custody enforcement and contempt issues.
I’m concerned that this statement—absent any evidentiary basis—undermines both the appearance and the reality of impartiality required by the Due Process Clause. I’d greatly appreciate your thoughts on whether this incident gives rise to a valid concern regarding judicial bias or a due process violation.
Lexi, Chatbot
Were there any specific legal issues or concerns discussed during the conference that you would like the lawyer to focus on?
Whether or not this meets the appearance standard for judicial disqualification. Especially in a case where the hearings and trials will be before the bench (including quasi-criminal like contempt).
Lexi, Chatbot
Is there anything else the lawyer should know before I connect you? Rest assured they’ll be able to help with your judicial disqualification concerns.
Yes
Jon
Hello and thank you for reaching out! I’m Jon, a licensed attorney with over 13 years of experience, and I’m here to help.
I know legal matters can feel overwhelming, but you're in good hands. I’ll do my best to make things clear and provide you with the guidance you need. Let’s work together to find the right solution for your situation.
Hi Jon.
Jon
You are asking if there is judicial bias present here?
The court actually asked me, “Do you know why this case is high conflict?” I didn’t know he was expecting an answer or if it was targeted to me. He then asked it more pointedly, to which I replied, “No,” and then he said, “You are the reason the case is high conflict.”
Jon
And what state is this happening in?
Oklahoma.
Jon
Understood! I think I have all the information I need, but is there anything else you'd like to add before I get started on your answer? If not, I'll start working on a response for you right away.
It concerns me because this is a four-year case where I’ve had to seek relief multiple times. The prior judge understood and admonished the respondent.
Jon
Got it! I just need a few minutes to finish typing out a complete response for you. It won’t take long—around four or five minutes—as I want to make sure I provide you with a thorough and thoughtful reply.
Jon
It's completely understandable why you're deeply concerned about the judge’s comment in your family law case. The situation raises serious questions about fairness, judicial ethics, and your constitutional right to due process. When a judge makes a statement like “You are the reason this case is high conflict”—especially without having presided over hearings or reviewed the facts—it’s more than just troubling. It suggests the judge may have formed an opinion prematurely, possibly aligning with the other party’s narrative before hearing both sides.
Judges are held to high standards of neutrality. They’re expected not only to be impartial, but also to avoid even the appearance of bias. Oklahoma’s judicial conduct rules, like those in other states, are clear on this. Judges must carry out their duties without prejudice and should step aside from a case when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. That’s not just about actual bias—even the perception of bias can be enough to justify recusal.
In your case, the judge made a definitive and damaging statement early on, despite not having reviewed the full record or considered any evidence. That’s a red flag. It gives the impression that the judge may have already taken sides, which is especially dangerous in custody disputes, where impartiality is absolutely essential. This concern becomes even more serious when future hearings involve contempt or enforcement issues—proceedings that require the highest level of fairness because they can carry real consequences.
Jon
Even worse, the judge refused to explain or clarify the statement when asked. If the comment had been based on something legitimate, the judge should’ve been able to back it up. The refusal to do so only reinforces the concern that the statement came from a place of assumption, not evidence.
Under the Fourteenth Amendment, you have a right to a fair hearing before a neutral judge. The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that sometimes, even without clear proof of bias, a judge must step aside if there’s a strong likelihood—or appearance—of bias that threatens due process. And in your case, that threshold may very well have been crossed.
Oklahoma’s rules say a judge must step down from a case whenever their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. That’s not a subjective standard—it’s about what a reasonable person would think, knowing all the facts. Given that this judge made a sweeping, one-sided comment without having considered evidence or history, and refused to explain it, a reasonable person could certainly question whether they can remain neutral.
Your concern is valid and serious. What happened doesn’t just raise ethical issues—it potentially threatens your right to a fair and impartial hearing. And that’s something worth addressing formally, possibly through a motion for recusal or another appropriate legal step.
I am curious if you know of any relevant cases I could read? Not just in Oklahoma—anywhere.
Jon
That we cannot do here; legal research is beyond the Q&A we do here, sorry to say.
Okay, no problem. Can the court walk back their statements after the fact? Even though, on the record, he wouldn’t clarify or detail exactly why that was his finding?
Jon
A judge cannot simply erase or “walk back” a statement made on the official court record, as it remains a permanent part of the transcript. While the judge could, at a later hearing, attempt to clarify their prior comment or explain its context, this doesn't remove the original statement. Such clarification might also be offered in response to a formal motion to disqualify the judge.
The fact that the judge initially refused to elaborate on the statement on the record strengthens concerns that it was an unreasoned prejudgment, making any later attempt at clarification more challenging to be seen as credible. Ultimately, an appellate court would assess the judge's impartiality based on the recorded events, including the initial statement and any subsequent explanations.
Last question—this was a status conference, and there wasn’t a court reporter. That doesn’t necessarily erase relief, does it?
Jon
Correct, it does not.
Sorry, one more. On a scale of 1 to 10, as an attorney—how much does a comment like that irk you, if it were happening to your client?
Jon
7–8. Quite a bit.
Thank you for answering the questions.
Jon
Very welcome—glad I was able to help!
Jon
556 satisfied customers
5 lawyers online now
Disclaimer
By messaging AskaLawyer.com, you agree to our Terms and have read our Privacy Policy.
The information provided on AskaLawyer.com is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. While we strive to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of the information presented, we make no guarantees regarding its completeness or applicability to your specific circumstances.
Use of this website does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and AskaLawyer.com or any of its attorneys. Communications through this website, including any responses from attorneys, are not privileged or confidential. For advice tailored to your individual situation, we recommend consulting a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.
AskaLawyer.com disclaims any liability for actions taken or not taken based on the content of this site. We are not responsible for any third-party content that may be accessed through this website. Reliance on any information provided herein is solely at your own risk.
