On Monday, February 16, 2026, the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) filed a response to Judge Thomas C. Bordeaux, Jr.’s notice of exceptions to the Hearing Panel’s report and recommendation.
The case, identified as S25Z0981, involves two Supreme Court Docket Numbers, S25Z0219 and S25Z0981, and JQC Complaint Numbers 2023-1082 and 2025-081. The JQC is seeking the removal of Judge Bordeaux from his position as a judge of the Chatham County Probate Court.
The JQC’s response, signed by Director Courtney Veal, addresses Judge Bordeaux’s alleged misconduct and failures in handling judicial matters. The JQC argues that Judge Bordeaux repeatedly failed citizens seeking resolution of disputes in his court.
According to the document, the JQC maintains that Judge Bordeaux suggested his failures were due to a lack of funding and staffing. However, the JQC contends that since taking office in January 2017, Judge Bordeaux has received increased funding for additional staff and new case management software. The JQC asserts that Judge Bordeaux has not fully utilized existing staff and is unwilling to enter orders not prepared by him, nor does he use standard form orders or conduct remote proceedings.
The JQC’s response details several specific cases, including the Estate of Joseph Barnes, Jr., In re: Joseph Adger, Estate of Raquel Petty, Estate of Charles Masterpolis, Estate of Mae Lyle, and Estate of Roberta Satney. In each case, the JQC alleges delays and failures by Judge Bordeaux to issue timely orders, despite multiple notifications from the JQC Director.
The JQC argues that Judge Bordeaux stipulated to the facts forming the basis of 16 counts and admitted to violating CJC Rule 2.2. The Hearing Panel found that each of the CJC Rule 2.2 counts was proven by clear and convincing evidence.
The JQC also alleges violations of CJC Rule 2.5(A), which requires judges to perform judicial and administrative duties competently and diligently. The JQC claims Judge Bordeaux failed to perform his judicial duties competently and diligently in the aforementioned cases by failing to timely issue orders or otherwise timely dispose of the matters.
The JQC argues that Judge Bordeaux’s violations of the CJC warrant discipline based on willful misconduct in office, willful and persistent failure to perform the duties of office, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
The JQC concludes that removal from judicial office is the appropriate sanction, arguing that Judge Bordeaux’s misconduct demonstrates he is unfit to hold judicial office. The JQC asserts that Judge Bordeaux has been given ample opportunity to correct his behavior but has failed to do so.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
