This month, Marcellino & Tyson secured a significant victory for one of their family law clients. The dispute was part of a years-long contentious divorce between Marcellino & Tyson’s client, Mother, and her ex-husband. After the Mecklenburg County District Court Judge recused herself following the Father’s accusations of bias toward the Mother and/or prejudice against the Father, matters related to child support and alimony remained unresolved. Father insisted that the Judge should enter an order despite her recusal, leading to a legal standoff.
Danielle Walle and Matt Marcellino, the Marcellino & Tyson attorneys who represented Mother, objected to the order. They argued that the judge lacked the authority to issue orders after recusing herself. Despite the objection, the Judge did enter an order.
Danielle and Matt appealed the order; the crux of their argument rested on the principle that a recused Judge should not participate in subsequent decisions. In its opinion published on March 19, 2024, the North Carolina Court of Appeals agreed with Danielle and Matt. The Court deemed it disingenuous to argue for an order following a recusal. Their ruling emphasized the importance of maintaining impartiality and the integrity of the judicial system.
In this published case, the court established a precedent that underscores the need for consistency and transparency, ensuring that recusal remains meaningful and that decisions should not be tainted by even the appearance of bias.
This victory is one example of Marcellino & Tyson’s advocacy skills and commitment to justice. It’s a victory we were happy to obtain for our client.
We work assiduously for our clients every time and never roll over when we come up against a wall, but look to find other available avenues that will lead to what we know is right and our desired result for the client.