On Tuesday, November 26, 2024, Law.com reported that the investigation into judicial misconduct involving Chatham County Probate Judge Thomas C. Bordeaux, Jr. is advancing toward an ethics hearing. The Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) of Georgia has issued a scheduling order detailing the next steps in the case, which has drawn significant attention due to allegations of failure to manage court cases efficiently.

According to the order signed by Presiding Officer Brian Rickman, both parties involved in the proceedings must exchange the names and addresses of all witnesses they intend to call at the hearing by January 6, 2025. This requirement includes witnesses whose testimonies may be presented via deposition. The order emphasizes the necessity for thorough preparation as the investigation unfolds.

As part of the discovery process, Rickman has set a deadline of December 4 for JQC Director Courtney Veal to provide Bordeaux with all exculpatory evidence relevant to the formal charges against him. The order stipulates that both parties must share the names of individuals who possess knowledge of the relevant facts and any other evidence as defined under JQC Rule 22(B)(1-2).

The discovery period for the investigation is scheduled to conclude on February 3, 2025, unless an extension is granted for “good cause” by Rickman. Following this period, the parties are required to submit all dispositive motions by March 4. Responses to these motions must be filed by April 3, with additional replies due by April 11. A formal date for the JQC hearing is expected to be announced after the pleadings are received.

The formal charges against Judge Bordeaux were presented by Veal and JQC Deputy Director Ashton Murphy on October 3. The allegations assert that Bordeaux failed to “fairly, promptly, and efficiently dispose of” at least nine probate cases since taking office in January 2017. The 10-count charge document claims that Bordeaux violated multiple provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct, specifically Rule 2.5(A) and Rule 2.2.

Rule 2.5(A) mandates that judges perform their judicial and administrative duties competently and without bias. Bordeaux is accused of violating this rule repeatedly, as well as failing to adhere to Rule 2.2, which requires judges to manage all judicial matters in a timely and efficient manner. The JQC’s commentary on Rule 2.2 highlights the importance of ensuring that parties have their rights respected and that their cases are resolved without unnecessary delay or cost.

The charges detail that Bordeaux’s alleged failures resulted in delays ranging from 11 months to over seven years for the probate cases in question. Many of these cases were inherited by Bordeaux when he succeeded Judge Harris Lewis, who had served for 21 years before retiring.

Bordeaux’s legal team, comprised of attorneys S. Lester Tate III from Akin & Tate and W. Matthew Wilson from Bell Wilson Law, filed a response to the charges on November 6. In this response, Bordeaux admitted to the first sentence of the conclusion of the JQC’s charging document but denied the remaining allegations. His counsel acknowledged that some violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct could warrant disciplinary action if they constitute willful misconduct or persistent failures to perform judicial duties. However, they contested the assertion that Bordeaux’s actions amounted to willful misconduct or conduct that would bring the judicial office into disrepute.

Bordeaux admitted to nine of the ten charges outlined by the JQC but sought to clarify some factual discrepancies related to the allegations of delayed case handling. The only charge he denied was the tenth, which accused him of failing to competently and diligently perform his duties concerning the delayed matters.

 

 

Source: Law.com