In
the case of Philadelphia Cmty. Dev. Cole. v. Isabella, May Term, 2016, No. 04133 (C.P. Phila. Co. March 27, 2019 Powell, J.), the court addressed the current
status of the Pennsylvania law surrounding a motion for recusal of a trial court judge.
In
denying the motion, the court noted that the parties seeking their recusal at a
pattern of filing recusal motions at the trial level and on appeal, all of
which had been previously denied. The court also observed that all of the
party’s recusal motions had been filed after the court issued decisions adverse
to that party.
The court generally noted that judges are presumed under Pennsylvania law to be fair and competent.
The court generally noted that judges are presumed under Pennsylvania law to be fair and competent.
It was also noted that a party seeking recusal was required to raise the objection
at the earliest possible moment or the issue would be considered
time-barred.
The
court otherwise noted that, once a trial in a matter was completed, a party was
deemed to have waived the right to have a judge disqualified.
In
cases where after-discovered evidence was involved, the moving party was
required to show that the evidence could not have been brought to the attention
of the court in the exercise of due diligence and that the existence of the
evidence would have compelled a different result.
In
this matter, the party did not submit its Motion for Recusal until more than
four (4) months after the trial court had finally decided the matter. The court concluded that the Motion for
Recusal was therefore untimely such that the issues raised were waived.
The court additionally found that the party failed to meet the requirements regarding after-discovered evidence given that that evidence could have been easily discovered through a simple internet search and presented to the court far sooner.
The court additionally found that the party failed to meet the requirements regarding after-discovered evidence given that that evidence could have been easily discovered through a simple internet search and presented to the court far sooner.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.