What constitutes a hearing in an order to show cause?
Is it a conference in judges chambers with no court reporter or transcript? - and
Where the petitioner was denied access by an armed court officer? - and
Where interested parties and general public was denied access? - and
Decision is then based on the parers submitted and not oral arguments purportedly heard at “hearing”?
What are the options to deal with this “rogue judge?”
Cases and/or statute please
Hello, I am happy to answer your question.
It doesn't sound right to me.
What court are you in?
new york civil court
Looking at the Civil Practice Law and Rules I do not find any rule that states that a hearing is "required" for an order to show cause to be considered.
This might be where you have difficulty here, because if there is no hearing required at all, then what the judge did was to NOT have a hearing, and to decide based upon just the papers, which i believe is what was stated in the decision, correct?
It certainly doesn't sound like you are being treated very fairly, but to be honest I don't think you have recourse in this instance. The judge decided on the papers, so what happened in court that day wasn't on the record.
Your option is to appeal, but you will need to have a basis for that appeal based upon the papers, not based upon what the judge did.
You can also make a motion to have the judge removed from the case. This is a VERY tricky thing, and I have seen it go very wrong for people. It doesn't happen often and only if there is a severe conflict of interest. In the end , the judge is the judge and it is his courtroom, so as long as he isn't going extremely outside of some written rules, there is not much you can do.
I hope this was helpful and good luck to you.
the problem is that the opposing parties response papers claimed law x held sway, my attorney argued that law y held sway. judge did not acknowledge law y or that there was any arguments presented..
also, On the order to show cause it enjoined opposing party from certain activities until there is a hearing".
does that do anything?
Ok. The judge does not have to lay out every aspect of his reasoning in a decision, unfortunately, so the fact that he didn't mention law y doesn't really help you.
The injunction from certian activites until there is a hearing is fine as well. I assume he didn't say when that hearing should be?
I think you will have to go with the flow on this one unfortunately.
it was the date that the armed guard would not let me no chambers.
Ok, but what was the outcome of the injunction aspect after that "hearing" date in he judge's decision. Did he lift that injunction or is it now a permanent injunction? I am just trying to get a clearer picture here.
return date was march 18.
on that date was when petitioner was not allowed into chambers when arguments were made. and in fact armed guard kept ALL interested parties out.
1 week later a long form decision is requested.
98 days after return date decision is issued.
decision includes no reference to anything attorneys argued, and in fact states that decision is "on the papers submitted" as though the arguments had never been made.
in decision, motion is denied and judge lifted stays 98 days after "hearing" in chambers without reporter/transcript.
I don't think there is anything you can do about this from my perspective. Especially since the judge kept all interested parties out of chambers and lifted the stays.
Best of luck,
Hello. I see that you received all of my answers.
Please click "Accept" so that I can get paid for my work.
Thanks and good luck.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).