DIGEST
The digest printed below was prepared by House Legislative Services. It constitutes no part of the
legislative instrument. The keyword, one-liner, abstract, and digest do not constitute part of the law
or proof or indicia of legislative intent. [R.S. 1:13(B) and 24:177(E)]
HB 328 Original 2021 Regular Session Cormier
Abstract: Provides grounds for the recusal of judges.
Present law provides that a judge of any court shall be recused when he does any of the following:
(1) Is a witness in the cause.
(2) Has been employed or consulted as an attorney in the cause or has previously been associated
with an attorney during the latter's employment in the cause, and the judge participated in
representation in the cause.
(3) Is the spouse of a party, or of an attorney employed in the cause or the judge's parent, child,
or immediate family member is a party or attorney employed in the cause.
(4) Is biased, prejudiced, or interested in the cause or its outcome or biased or prejudiced toward
or against the parties or the parties' attorneys or any witness to such an extent that he would
be unable to conduct fair and impartial proceedings.
Proposed law repeals present law and provides that a judge shall recuse himself in any proceeding
in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the
following circumstances:
(1)The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer or personal
knowledge of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.
(2) The judge knows that the judge, the judge's spouse or domestic partner, or a person within
the third degree of relationship to either of them or the spouse or domestic partner of such
a person is any of the following:
(a) A party to the proceeding or an officer, director, general partner, managing member,
or trustee of a party.
(b) Acting as a lawyer in the proceeding.
(c) A person who has more than a de minimis interest that could be substantially affected
by the proceeding. (d) Likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.
(3) The judge knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or the judge's spouse, domestic
partner, parent, or child, or any other member of the judge's family residing in the judge's
household, has an economic interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the
proceeding.
(4) The judge knows or learns by means of a timely motion that a party, a party's lawyer, or the
law firm of a party's lawyer has made aggregate contributions to the judge's campaign in an
amount that exceeds what is reasonable and appropriate for an individual or an entity.
(5) The judge, while a judge or a judicial candidate, has made a public statement, other than in
a court proceeding, judicial decision, or opinion, that commits or appears to commit the
judge to reach a particular result or rule in a particular way in the proceeding or controversy.
(6) The judge has done any of the following:
(a)Served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy or was associated with a lawyer who
participated substantially as a lawyer in the matter during such association.
(b) Served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated personally and
substantially as a lawyer or public official concerning the proceeding or has publicly
expressed in such capacity an opinion concerning the merits of the particular matter
in controversy.
(c) Was a material witness concerning the matter.
(d) Previously presided as a judge over the matter in another court.
(e)Has been involved in personal litigation with or against a party or a party's lawyer.
(f) Made a public statement criticizing a party or a party's lawyer.
(7) The judge is facing criminal prosecution, an administrative hearing, or there exists any
contemporaneous leverage over the judge or his property by a party or a party's attorney, or
the attorney's family member to the fourth degree.
(8) The judge is involved in an intimate relationship with a party or a party's attorney.
Present law provides that a judge may be recused when he does any of the following:
(1) Has been associated with an attorney during the latter's employment in the cause.
(2) Has performed a judicial act in the cause in another court. (3)Is related to an attorney employed in the cause or the spouse of the attorney, within the
second degree.
(4)The judge's spouse, parent, child, or immediate family member living in the judge's
household has a substantial economic interest in the subject matter in controversy sufficient
to prevent the judge from conducting fair and impartial proceedings in the cause.
Proposed law repeals present law.
Present law provides that a judge may be recused when at the time of the hearing of any contested
issue in the cause, has continued to employ, to represent him personally, the lawyer actually handling
the cause and in this case the employment shall be disclosed to each party in the cause.
Proposed law retains present law but makes the grounds for recusal mandatory.
Present law further provides that a judge may be recused when he is related to a party or the spouse
of a party, within the fourth degree. Proposed law provides that the judge may be recused when he
is related to a party or the spouse of a party in the fourth degree.
Proposed law requires a judge to keep informed of his personal and fiduciary economic interests and
make a reasonable effort to keep informed about the personal economic interests of his spouse or
domestic partner and minor children residing in his household.
Proposed law provides that a judge subject to recusal, other than for bias or prejudice, may disclose
on the record the basis of the judge's recusal and may ask the parties and their lawyers to consider
outside the presence of the judge and court personnel whether to waive recusal.
Proposed law further provides that if following the disclosure the parties and lawyers agree that the
judge should not be recused, the judge may participate in the proceeding and the agreement shall be
incorporated into the record of the proceeding.
Present law provides that in any cause in which the state, or a political subdivision thereof, or a
religious body or corporation is interested, the fact that the judge is a citizen of the state or a resident
of the political subdivision, or pays taxes thereto, or is a member of the religious body or
corporation, is not a ground for recusal.
Proposed law retains present law.
Proposed law provides definitions for "aggregate", "contribution", "de minimis", "domestic partner",
"economic interest", "fiduciary", "impartiality", "judicial candidate", "knowledge", and "member
of the judge's family".
(Amends C.C.P. Art. 151)