325 S.W.2d 309 | Ky. Ct. App. | 1959
This is a proceeding for relief in the nature of that formerly obtained by the obsolete writ of prohibition. We will treat the petition as one for similar relief under RCA 1.420.
The petition alleges there is pending in the Clinton Circuit Court an action styled Commonwealth of Kentucky on relation of Jo M. Ferguson, Attorney General v. Petitioners to oust them as members of the Clinton County Board of Education. It alleges a motion for respondent to vacate the bench and affidavits were filed which disclosed respondent was too biased and prejudiced against petitioners to fairly try the action. The petition further alleges that respondent orally overruled the motion and had made several other oral rulings in the action, but had failed to enter any orders with respect thereto, and was thereby preventing a review of same by this court. However, that failure is not the basis of petitioners’ complaint. They do not ask that respondent be directed to enter such orders, but pray only that he be enjoined “from taking further action or entering further orders or judgments in the action.” Consequently, the petition is predicated on the theory that respondent is proceeding erroneously within his jurisdiction, solely because of his alleged bias and prejudice.
The proper procedure to prevent a biased judge from acting is to file a motion, supported by affidavit or affidavits for him to vacate the bench, and if he refuses to do so upon proper showing, the movant has an adequate remedy by appeal. Brents v. Burnett, 295 Ky. 337, 174 S.W.2d 521; Sizemore v. Stivers, 287 Ky. 153, 151 S.W.2d 1059. For the above reasons alone the petition should be dismissed.
It appears from the record that on or about the day the petition in this proceeding was filed the respondent filed and entered of record an opinion and judgment in the circuit court action, in which he ruled and passed upon all questions and issues involved. This was apparently done before respondent had any knowledge of the institution of the present proceeding, or at least before the temporary order was served. Petitioners had an adequate remedy by appeal from the judgment.
This court has repeatedly held that its original jurisdiction to issue writs to control inferior courts cannot be invoked as a substitute for an appeal when no appeal lies. Schaetzley v. Wright, Ky., 271 S.W.2d 885, and cases cited therein. The fact that an appealable judgment cannot be superseded is no basis for a different ruling.
For the above reasons the temporary writ issued in this proceeding is dissolved and the petition is dismissed at petitioners’ cost.