Lisa Faye Roland Camp v. Randy Coleman Camp
361 S.W.3d 539
Tenn. Ct. App.2011Background
- Second appeal in acrimonious divorce between Wife and Husband; post-divorce alimony modification and recusal issues; initial divorce judge recused himself due to friendship and perception of conflict; special judge tried the divorce and awarded Wife alimony in futuro; Husband later sought to terminate alimony; trial judge (same judge) denied recusal and terminated alimony; appellate court reverses recusal ruling and vacates alimony termination, remanding for assignment to a different judge; alimony obligation suspended pending remand proceedings.
- Chancery Court proceeded on cross-petitions to modify alimony before a new judge was assigned; Wife moved to disqualify the current judge based on prior recusal and ongoing relationships; trial court denied the motion to disqualify; upon review, appellate court found error in denial of disqualification and vacated the modification ruling.
- Record shows the recusal turn on personal friendship with the parties and the appearance of bias; the appellate court emphasized objective standard that would lead a reasonable person to question impartiality, even if subjective bias is not shown.
- Wife argued that continuing friendship with the parties and Husband’s political influence warranted recusal; Husband argued Klein standard—recusal only when truly required; Court applied objective test and found reversible error in denying disqualification.
- Court suspended Husband’s alimony obligation pending resolution by a transferee judge and remanded for reassignment to a different judge; all other issues are pretermitted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recusal standard applied. | Roland Camp argues appearance of bias warrants recusal. | Camp argues no duty to recuse where no appearance of bias remains. | Reversed denial of disqualification; remanded to another judge. |
| Whether the trial court properly terminated alimony in futuro. | Wife asserts substantial change in circumstances justifying termination; but she seeks increase. | Husband contends no reversible error; a new evidentiary record is needed. | Remand; alimony suspended pending new trial. |
| Impact of Wife's and family’s campaign letters on bias. | Letters created appearance of impropriety affecting judicial neutrality. | Letters are not evidence of actual bias. | Addressed within recusal ruling; bias-related issues led to reversal. |
| Effect of prior recusal on current proceedings. | Past recusal implies ongoing appearance of impropriety. | Time elapsed negates appearance of bias. | Sustained reversal; remand to avoid potential bias. |
| Remedy on recusal error. | Remand to a different judge is necessary for fairness. | Proceedings could continue before a different judge. | Remanded for reassignment to a different trial judge; suspends alimony obligation pending outcome. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bean v. Bailey, 280 S.W.3d 798 (Tenn. 2009) (appearance of bias matters in recusal decisions)
- Davis v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 38 S.W.3d 560 (Tenn. 2001) (objective standard for recusal—impartiality may be questioned)
- Kinard v. Kinard, 986 S.W.2d 220 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998) (recusal standards and appellate review guidance)
- State v. Cannon, 254 S.W.3d 287 (Tenn. 2008) (recusal: objective analysis of impartiality)
- Odom v. State, 336 S.W.3d 541 (Tenn. 2011) (recusal and appearance of bias considerations emphasized)