Opinion
No. 20-AP-055
07-23-2020
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF REISINGER. Baumann v. Baumann.
{¶ 1} Defendant Marcel Baumann has filed an affidavit pursuant to R.C. 2701.03 seeking to disqualify Judge Lori L. Reisinger from the above-referenced divorce case.
{¶ 2} Mr. Baumann alleges that Judge Reisinger lacks jurisdiction over the matter and that she has demonstrated bias against him by, among other things, ignoring his allegations against the plaintiff, issuing temporary orders that violated his due-process rights, and engaging in an improper ex parte communication. Mr. Baumann also avers that Judge Reisinger has a financial interest in the case and that at one hearing, she indicated that she had personal knowledge of the plaintiff.
{¶ 3} Judge Reisinger filed a response to the affidavit and requests that it be denied. The judge denies having any bias against Mr. Baumann or any financial interest in the case. She further notes that at the temporary-orders hearing, she stated that she had knowledge of the plaintiff's employer, the county's 9-1-1 dispatch center, but that she did not personally know the employees. The judge further states that the underlying case is in the beginning stages and that Mr. Baumann will have the opportunity to present his evidence at the appropriate time.
{¶ 4} In disqualification requests, "[t]he term ‘bias or prejudice’ ‘implies a hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will or undue friendship or favoritism toward one of the litigants or his attorney, with the formation of a fixed anticipatory judgment on the part of the judge, as contradistinguished from an open state of mind which will be governed by the law and the facts.’ " In re Disqualification of O'Neill , 100 Ohio St.3d 1232, 2002-Ohio-7479, 798 N.E.2d 17, ¶ 14, quoting State ex rel. Pratt v. Weygandt , 164 Ohio St. 463, 469, 132 N.E.2d 191 (1956). "The proper test for determining whether a judge's participation in a case presents an appearance of impropriety is * * * an objective one. A judge should step aside or be removed if a reasonable and objective observer would harbor serious doubts about the judge's impartiality." In re Disqualification of Lewis , 117 Ohio St.3d 1227, 2004-Ohio-7359, 884 N.E.2d 1082, ¶ 8. Mr. Baumann has not established that Judge Reisinger has hostility toward him or that she has formed a fixed anticipatory judgment on any issue in the underlying matter. Nor has he set forth a compelling argument for disqualifying Judge Reisinger to avoid an appearance of partiality.
{¶ 5} It is well-settled that an affidavit of disqualification "addresses the narrow issue of the possible bias or prejudice of a judge" and "is not a vehicle to contest matters of substantive or procedural law." In re Disqualification of Solovan , 100 Ohio St.3d 1214, 2003-Ohio-5484, 798 N.E.2d 3, ¶ 4. Therefore, it is outside the scope of a judicial-disqualification proceeding to consider jurisdictional arguments or whether a judge has properly weighed a party's arguments. "Dissatisfaction or disagreement with a judge's rulings of law, without more, does not constitute bias or prejudice and thus is not grounds for disqualification." Id. Further, Mr. Baumann has failed to specifically explain how Judge Reisinger has a financial interest in the case or how she engaged in an improper ex parte communication. Vague and unsubstantiated allegations are insufficient for a finding of bias or prejudice. In re Disqualification of Walker , 36 Ohio St.3d 606, 522 N.E.2d 460 (1988). And regardless, there are circumstances in domestic-relations cases when a judge may issue temporary or emergency ex parte orders. Without more, Mr. Baumann has failed to demonstrate that any of Judge Reisinger's actions are a product of bias against him, nor has he demonstrated that a reasonable person would question her impartiality.
{¶ 6} The affidavit of disqualification is denied. The case may proceed before Judge Reisinger.