The Bet

[00:00:00]

ChristineLet's go to the courthouse. So you was there and let's see how many of the 37, 39 judges there are, right? Wait. 13, 10. 16, right. 39.

HughYep.

ChristineHow many do you think? Let's make a bet.

SpeakerYou are listening to The Judgemental Podcast. We're Hugh and Christine, the Minds Behind Judgy, the revolutionary app that empowers you to judge the judges. It's pastime for judicial accountability and transparency within the courts. Prepare for sharp insights, candid critiques, and unshakable honesty from two lawyers determined to save the system. We need some justice. Justice, my fine justice. And I wanna ring, be in public. I wanna ring, be in public crowd. Yeah.

ChristineI think too, like our local judges are the predominantly the sources. Like I know for a fact that, uh, like Joan Byer was a source for Courier Journal 100%.

HughOh, she, she would lie about not letting the [00:01:00] li, letting the press in a hearing, and she would, oh, I've had her tell me that she was going to let us come in at a specific time because I had a high profile case. And the court, the, the press was kind of around the courtroom looking for us. Come in this way. Come in on this floor. I'll, I'll, I'll even let you in the back door. We'll come in. We'll get it done before the press, you know, can, can pick up on it because I know that this could affect your, your client's reputation and like this stuff. Okay, great. I mean, you don't have to do that as a judge. Yeah. It's supposed to be public if the press is there, but great. I'm gonna take advantage of that as an advocate for my client. Well, I get there and not only are they in the courtroom, but they've obviously had all the time in the world to set up and she starts by making a statement and totally different than the way she would normally do it. Yeah. And she just set it up, the whole thing. And, uh, I remember walking in and just, I just realized I'd be like, yep. This is she absolutely has set this up to grandstand. Yep. And I think

Christinethat's the system. Like, so then the news is like, well, the judge is my source and then I [00:02:00] can get clickbait, and now they just go down to the courthouse and watch the arraignments. I mean, that's the only thing they seem to report on.

HughYeah. But I mean, so think about this. You have a judge who is a source for the media. Yeah. And you have something that mine was a alleged alleged domestic violence, case. It was someone who was prominent that people in the community would've heard about and it could have affected his job. and the judge as a source has this the press there and they're going to see how she rules on this case. Mm-hmm. That the public is going to think, oh, this guy's a terrible guy. Right. You think there's any pressure on her to rule in a specific way? Are you kidding me? And that, that was one something that I. In the middle of it, I asked for a recess to talk to opposing counsel and got something worked out very favorable for my client because it was just so obvious that she was grandstanding, she was grandstanding about the issue, about domestic violence. And in fact, when we settled it and [00:03:00] agreed to handle it in the divorce case that was being filed by opposing counsel, um, she did everything in her power to talk them out of settling it and was playing it up for the cameras, like pushing and pushing and pushing to get the parties to not agree on. But she never

Christinewould've done if it was pro se or she never would've done if it was not, if it was just a typical domestic violence day. Yes.

HughSo yeah, them being a source and having them, inviting them into the courtroom. I think on its face doesn't look like a conflict of interest, but if you are ruling on something right, that the public would be outraged if you ruled in a different way. Right. Regardless of what the facts or the case dictated. That's such a clear conflict of interest, and I know, uh, you're, you're right. That's the one person I know that was a regular source for the press. I know it happens in other places. I just, I, you probably know a lot better than I do who those other sources might be.

ChristineYeah. Well, we, in Louisville, we've got Micha Van, who is the court administrator, but he's a retired judge and he actively is a spokesperson for [00:04:00] judges, which I think is a violation of. The judicial cannons. I mean, really, they shouldn't have a spokesperson, a press secretary, talking about rulings, like in, in a way to control the media. But I know for a fact he squashed the story with WDRB when we had the selfie recording of the TikTok judge, like they were going to do a story on it, like 100%. And then he filled out some questions, basically just saying that I didn't understand things and that the judges have a right to educate the public.

HughThat's interesting. Yeah. So I mean, I, I, I don't, I, it's hard for me to weigh in on that 'cause I don't know what the actual position entails. Right. I can see it being, you know, if he represents the judiciary here and I mean, there's gotta be a PR aspect to that. And I can see that being correct for him to do. From, uh, this is your job kind of thing. Yeah. But then you also, he's a judge. He's an ex judge. He's representing judges. You have different rules than, than most other employees or most other people that would be in a position. I don't know [00:05:00] enough about it. I would be speaking out of ignorance, but I That is fascinating. It makes me, it makes everybody feel a certain

Christinekind of way. Right. You know,

Hughbut I mean, ultimately the result is acting to keep, I mean, it's interesting to say the judges have an obligation to educate the public, but in, in effect, what you're doing by making that statement and defending the judge's behavior is making sure that the public doesn't get to know about that particular instance. Literally, you just, just keeping, keeping, uh, keeping the judiciary here in this county from being embarrassed by the activities that just look really bad from one particular judge. Oh man,

ChristineMcKay. Um, and then I don't think the Courier Journal, they're not gonna report on anything unless it is about a politician first as far as family court. So obviously they covered Matt Bevin's case. Um, but I don't think that I've ever seen anything in the Courier Journal, criticized critical of outcomes of family court. Have you, [00:06:00]

HughI think there have been some weird opinions, that I've heard that there were articles critical of, but I think it was, and, and I'll have to look, but I mean, there's been. Judges who refuse to grant a divorce to someone for odd reasons. Yes. That was Monica

ChristineMari Meredith outta Bullock County. Yeah, but that's not Louisville.

HughNo, that's not in Louisville. I think something was written about it. I think granting custodial rights to a fetus. Oh. Warranted a few articles in the press. I don't think,

Christinedid the courier write about that?

HughI don't know that the courier did. I, what I know is no one that I knew from outside of the legal community, outside of the family law community even knew about it. But I think that it did get talked about maybe in some small way in some press. And so for

Christinea reference, this is Judge, um, almost said Adams Judge, Lauren Ogden, that declared, I guess a fetus, a child, and awarded custody of a fetus to a pregnant mother without confirmation that she was

Hughpregnant. Temporary custody, I believe at [00:07:00] a DI believe that it was a DVO hearing. It was. And, and the woman claimed to be pregnant and she awarded. Yeah,

ChristineI think it was on Zoom too. Maybe not. I could be wrong on that, but that sounds like division four.

HughIt's, I mean, it's it's an odd circumstance and I, I think I remember reading something about it, although it may have been on someone's blog. Okay. Um, I typically, most of what I've, I hear about that our judges do is from other attorneys, um, blogs or, you know, people that write short articles about published opinions and things like that. Less in the courier, anywhere like that.

ChristineBut people are much more likely to touch traffic court or family court than they ever are, you know, circuit court felony stuff or high asset, um, fights there. And so it's just perplexing to me that there's not more reporting on it.

HughI also think, if I'm a reporter, a multi-day jury trial or a jury trial where you're gonna get a ruling that day, you're waiting for the jury to come back, that is far more [00:08:00] interesting. if you're making a report. for the daily news or you're doing a news piece, on air that's a lot more interesting true than something that well, both sides presented. And it's a complex issue, and it could be six months before we hear about it. It's gonna be hard to get people's attention that way. That's true. So I, I get that aspect of it, but I What was, I mean, to the extent that we have judges that are sources to the press, what is the goal? I, I felt like control the narrative. I didn't. Yeah, but why so it's all about, I didn't understand about politics. Bayer retired before she ran again. She wasn't in any danger of being removed that I had heard of. And I had had to try to remove her and remove her from cases, um, for some of the things that she did that I found, I saw her doing on video and would have to, you know, file motions to recuse her. But she never seemed to get in any trouble. She wasn't, there was no heat on her and she wasn't, I don't believe, [00:09:00] planning to run again at that time. So what would be the. Point, uh, you know, of, of her wanting to leak things and set things up for the press, I guess? Well, I

Christinethink so many, many of these judges are just doing it for power. Like they just want to be quote unquote famous. The reality is, you know, any good litigators that work 40 hours a week that are making less than what these judges are, they're all making more.

HughI don't know that. I think, I think probably, I think, um, there was a time where, um, hell, uh, this makes me feel old. I know in 2011 was the first time I believe that the a BA journal published that less than 50% of people coming outta law school had jobs. And a lot of schools in the next seven, eight years following that, um, close their law schools shrunk the size because it was getting flooded. There was a period of time where I could have an attorney for less than a paralegal, and I could do that [00:10:00] for years, and I was able to hire them Now. I always wanted to pay bonuses and keep good people, and we wanted to pay really well. Yeah. But the starting non-guaranteed money was, you know, a fraction of what judges made. And now I was just starting out. They, I couldn't afford, you know, when it was just me working to hire people for more. So I, it was helpful to me and, uh. But I know for a long time, attorneys were struggling. I knew a lot of people, uh, when I lived in DC that just worked contract jobs on the side because, you know, their litigation practice couldn't earn enough to live in that city. And, which is

Christinelike a whole different thing though. People that decide they, Hey, I wanna work so I could have security and have health insurance. Yeah. But I'm talking about anybody that's a solo practitioner that's successful. You know, when I was practicing, I didn't often work 40 hours a week. I mean, I tried to take some time off and travel and do all of that. That's what I loved about practicing was the flexibility. But these judges, I guess to go back to, why are they sources? They want the attention, they want the fame. [00:11:00] They want to be the quote unquote, good guy, good girl. You know? I mean, I

Hughguess that's the, you know, same motivation for wanting to go on TikTok. I don't know, LL if there's really a motivation to try to get reelected and you're gonna be able to do it by TikTok in this political age, who knows, maybe that works. But I, I, I could never figure it out with Judge Byer back in the day. Why? I don't know. And, and maybe it could have been my client at the time, she just, you know, I mean, some people just did not like him. There were lots of people coming outta the woodwork to take him down. It was pretty rough. But you shouldn't be the

Christinejudge, you know? I mean, no.

HughYeah, that's exactly how I felt. and at the time, opposing counsel was not involved in that aspect of it. The opposing side changed counsel and got someone who was very much involved in trying to do things behind the scenes to put pressure on my client with source. Okay. Not at the time that that happened, the, the first time that it happened, uh, with Judge Byer inviting them in and having a whole gallery of press waiting when we walked into the [00:12:00] courtroom expecting that we were gonna have a short, private hearing

Christineand then told you the opposite. Well, and the thing about Joan, and, you know, I came back in 2014, so for anyone listening. Louisville Family Court had a complete flip. Like it was all new judges for the most part. I think one maybe stayed, but I only there

Hughwere two Haney. Oh yeah. Um, and two And Sherlock stayed in 10 for a lot. For a little bit. Yep.

ChristineAnd I was in front of Joan one time and she started a DVO without me being present. Like I was in a different court room and she was rude. She was all the things, I mean, I was shocked about her demeanor. And then of course I ran into her, you know, a year later and she wants me to use her as a mediator and, oh, are you the nicest person that's ever lived? But I do think there is something to be said about judges in general having favorites or treating attorneys differently, that practice in front of them all the time as opposed to outside counsel.

HughOh, sure. No, I, I agree completely, but I also know that they're human. Yeah. And that's gonna be part of it. And we were talking earlier about judges in smaller towns that, and I, I do believe that there are [00:13:00] judges who want to be good civil servants and they go in there because they love their community and want to do it. In fact, uh, the former judge in Oldham County, judge Feely, he just cared about his community and you could tell. Mm-hmm. And he wanted to do what was right, regardless of whether it was within the rules of the law. He, but he knew everybody in that community and there was no way around that. Yeah. You couldn't have a judge from the towns that he, you know, uh, where he worked and where he lived, where he wouldn't know everybody. And that's just going to be part of it. I don't think you can get that out of the system. And in fact, bringing, you know, making someone from a different county be a judge over, you know, a specific county. It doesn't seem quite right either. I mean, when you're dealing with jury trials, you want the juror, the jurors to be representative of you. They want, you want them to be your peers to a certain extent, although it's not explicit in, in any founding documents or, you know, and the law, you kind of want your judge to be part of that community,

Christinepart [00:14:00] of the community. It's like police officers, I mean, you really want police policing areas in which they live. That's because they're gonna be more invested. but I just think the pendulum maybe has swung a little bit too far with judges. And now there are great judges. I think that I get text messages all the time. I wish you would talk about the good judges and every single appearance I've ever done, I've said there are good judges out there, there are great judges out there. I don't get many stories of that, and I do think it's because there are less of those good stories, at least right now.

HughWell, I think that's right. And I, and usually when I'm pointing out something that a judge has gone, you know, had, has done poorly, and this is, you know, I'm only a few months out of litigating, so I'm. Sort of still wearing that hat to a certain extent. I'm thinking about in this instance, the judge did the wrong thing. Mm-hmm. Didn't follow the law in this instance, not that this is a bad judge, that they did something incorrect or they didn't follow the law. I'm appealing because this is not correct and I'm still looking at it that way where I, where I can [00:15:00] see a judge doing something incorrect, that doesn't mean they're a bad judge. God knows I made tons of mistakes as a litigator, I would make just as many mistakes as a judge. I think it becomes concerning where there is intent, there's clear bias, there is a pattern. Mm-hmm. there is a disregard for the rules and, and just my way is the highway. I think that's different than when judges make a mistake. And I agree. When, when you asked me about, you know, good judges versus bad judges. I don't have like a super clear answer because I can say things that every single, just about every single judge has done that I've really, really admired and thought, man, I wish, you know, I wish all the judges would be that easy to go back and correct their errors when you point them out. I mean, certain ones that I have appealed multiple times and have opinions against, you know that, that I way too often point out the problems with, have done things throughout the cases that I thought were absolutely great. And then [00:16:00] there are others that. I think in general, I've always appreciated when I walk out of their courtroom, win or lose. I appreciate the way they handled it. Yeah, and I think that happens quite a bit, but you're right. People aren't going to go online and fme and, and write comments about, you know, how great when the judge has done things correctly and that's not, not terribly fair. It's also less interesting to the public when people are doing things well.

ChristineYeah. I'm two years out and I will tell you that there is a component. The further out you get where you're like, whoa, we were doing this wrong. Like the system is operating in a way that is perpetuating bad. Outcomes for families and kids and litigants wrapped up in it. You know what, Dan Cannon, have you ever read his book about the plea bargaining where No, that's like the biggest problem within our system is our system where we have plea bargains. Because if you don't take the plea it incentivizes taking the plea. Like 'cause if you go Sure, no, it

Hughabsolutely does.

Christine100 And I think that was the road to hell was paved with good intentions and obviously plea bargaining. [00:17:00] Bargaining was meant to resolve cases or get people to take accountability and get less time or get them in treatment, yada, yada. But I do think that maybe it's just gotten out of control where it's like a prosecutor is like, well if you don't take this deal then you're gonna get 20 and that's sick. I mean, that's a human being to some degree, you

Hughknow? Yeah, well I mean it's the adversarial system. Yeah. Like, so when I think, you know, when I came into family practice and I was, I was an attorney in a totally different realm in international environmental law and moved. It's at Louisville, Kentucky where that career doesn't exist. And I tried some cases in different, um, subject matters and found that I liked family law because you're arguing to a judge. You're arguing someone who ultimately, at least in theory, knows the rules, knows the law. You're not arguing and having to translate everything to a jury. So you can make the kind of arguments that you're thinking about in your head that you would wanna put in your pleadings and that you could, to a certain extent, predict, you know, it's hard with the [00:18:00] jury. Yeah, you might be in involved in picking your jury, but you don't really know how they're going to act, how they're gonna act to when they get together in a room with a judge. The more times you've been in front of him or her, you sort of know what you're getting, you know what to prepare for. I like that aspect of it. One of the things that really struck me coming into family law, at least in how family court works in Kentucky, which. It was a very progressive system, way out in front of, most of the other states and putting together a specialized system to deal with family issues is on its face, it seems like a much more humane, smart way to deal with soft issues involving kids, involving people's personal details and personal lives than to just have the typical adversarial hearing in front of a jury where someone else is just deciding your fate that easily. And you had all of these other tools. You have parenting coordinators and friends of the court and GS and yeah, in theory it

Christinelooks great.

HughYeah. And like you said, the [00:19:00] road of hell is paved good intentions, but then it becomes this sort of, it sort of becomes a machine and it's a machine that. Develop, its develops its own habits and biases. Mm-hmm. And it evolves outside of what was intended by the law and the regulations and the lawmakers who set the system up Yep. Would probably be shocked to see how the system actually works now that it's evolved and it's grown. All of these different tentacles. Mm-hmm. And, um, yeah wish, wish I knew the answer.

ChristineWhat do think the checks are? Like, what are the checks on the judiciary right now? Are there any

HughI don't know of any that's, I we talked, we talked briefly about the, there there used to be the form you could file. Yeah. Like if a, if a court, just for the specific issue of untimely, um, ruling. So if a judge is sitting on something for a long time, we used to have a form we could fill out. It went to Frankfurt to the administrative office of the courts and they checked in to see if they could move things along.

Mm-hmm.

HughAnd to a certain extent, the judges would know that if they took too [00:20:00] long, someone was sort of paying attention and watching. Yeah. That was a small check. You have the Supreme Court, which regulates all of the judges. And in extreme cases, attorneys can bring things before the Supreme Court alleging things about the judges. So there, there's the check, but that's sort of a check. In the same way, bar complaints are against attorneys, yet nobody wants one. We all try to act in a way that that doesn't happen. But is it something you're thinking about every single day or even every week or even every month? Yeah. No,

Christineno, not at all. It's probably

Hughnot, even, not, not something that. And it is something that's every now and then someone will throw around and it's usually some meaningless threat and it's not something you're really terribly worried about. So I can't imagine the judges are thinking about, you know, those really rare circumstances where somebody brings a motion before the Supreme Court about a judge.

ChristineYeah, and I have some regrets honestly, for filing a complaint against the TikTok Judge for the selfie recording in the sense that the fact, all, I can say, obviously our ethics, but there was no public or [00:21:00] private reprimand that would be on the website if that happened. And that's all public record, but everything else is confidential. And I think that her knowing that a complaint was filed against her, that no one can ever see any process of that, and that nothing came from, it just emboldened her to, you know, post a TikTok today during her docket. You know? And I think that's like, what, what did I do? And now all the other judges are like, well, I mean, there's not gonna be any consequence.

HughWell, I, I agree. I, I've had an instance where. I had an order signed in a case, um, and it related to financials that were not before the court. Wait, what? That no one had ever heard. So this is, this is a case I had back hell, it was probably 10. Okay. No, probably 14, 13, 14 years ago. I had a case, high asset case. we were early on in the case. Then in the mail I get an order that requires my guy to pay like $10,000 worth of financial stuff on behalf of the other party every month. And [00:22:00] no disclosures have been filed. So what that means is no financial information has been put before the court at all. No one has filed any motions and it talked about specific accounts in the order. So clearly the judges talked to someone and learned something outside of the pleadings outside of that. So I went, knowing that the attorney on the other side was close to the judge or had been in the past and had other cases in front of the judge, I went and watched motion hour video. Saw an interaction up on the bench, uh, at the bench that was recorded where the judge asked that attorney about the case I was involved in and whether his attorney, whether his client was getting paid. And when he said no, she told him to bring an order by and said she'd be there this afternoon and shortly thereafter, I get an order. So these things are happening off the record. I brought that up to the Supreme Court. I brought a motion to remove her from the case. It got denied without much explanation. There was never any, there was never any, [00:23:00] that I had seen published. Nothing public anyway, um, where there was any reprimand that anything was actually done about it. it was a very short order denying my motion. Didn't get into the merits, didn't talk about anything. the.

ChristineDi denying your motion to have her recused,

Hughto have her recused for just blatantly ex parte and telling the other side to come by and ex parte and bring an order by, um, when no motion was filed. nothing was done to the judge and the chief judge at the time in Louisville reallocated the case. Okay. To his courtroom, took her off the case. So on a local level, my client was protected and the case got taken away from that judge, but nothing was done to the judge. But how many times do

Christineyou think that happened?

HughOh, I think, oh, I, I, it's hard to speculate. Uh, but the fact that it was that blatant, I raised it, I took it up to the body Yeah. That regulates judges. Nothing was done. I, I think if judges know they can get away with something like [00:24:00] that mm-hmm. Then there is no worry whatsoever about the regulating bodies.

ChristineAbsolutely. I mean, you should probably lose, I mean, you should be suspended from the bench obviously, for that. But I would say that's a major ethical violation just for having a law license.

HughUh, oh. Yeah. I mean, I think if I went an ex parte judge, I could get,

Christineyeah,

HughI could get suspended from practice. Oh. So a judge just inviting people to come by and bring orders that they will sign, with no hearing and nothing before the court. I, I, I just can't imagine. So I know that stuff happens. Yeah, I've seen it. I certainly wouldn't allege something like that if I didn't have video of it actually happening, and I couldn't believe it when I saw it. I remember bringing it to the attention of the clerks and the staff that worked in the family court at the time, and there's been a whole lot of turnover since then. So it's not the same people, none of them were surprised. They said that they'd heard about that kind of stuff. They knew what was happening. They were very happy. In fact, it was funny, I filed that with the Supreme Court. I went and had to ask, [00:25:00] I'd never done anything like that. I went and had to ask the clerks down at, you know, 700 West Jefferson first floor and the family court how to do it. And there was this one clerk, She was the head of adoptions at the time, and she was just always so prickly with me. Like there was just something, yeah, yeah, yeah. It was like oil and water, like she just acted like, and I was a young practitioner. I made a lot of mistakes or I would have to ask too many questions, but she just seemed so annoyed with me. I brought that motion by and was asking where I needed to file it, how it went through the process. She came around outside away from the desk and came up and gave me a hug. I was filing that against this judge because they had heard, they had so many people saying the same things and all this kind of stuff about her. This person didn't like me, came and gave me a hug for doing something about it. But

Christinejust to extrapolate that like further how often this is happening, how many like of my followers will say something that I may perceive initially like is crazy. There's no way that happened. And then you hear that this happened. Yeah. And that person was on the bench for many years. That person is no longer on [00:26:00] the bench, right?

HughNo, no longer on the bench.

ChristineThat's right. Um, but you just sometimes some of the stuff you can't make up and then that's where I get weird as far as talking about these good judges that I maybe respect or admire is you hang out with someone that does that you're okay with someone doing that because you guys are all in the same club. Like

HughYeah, but how, what do you, I mean, first of all so just in the few short weeks that we've been working together, I've learned so much that is just blown my mind. And I know that other people were experiencing this all the time, but I didn't know about it. Yeah. When I was working hard and I was working around the clock as a litigation attorney, I knew this kind of stuff was going on, but I was worried about getting through my stuff. I fully understand that these judges, the ones that are working hard and doing their good job, have way more work than they can ever get done. And let's say a judge is two floors up from someone [00:27:00] downstairs, how often are they interacting other than the kind of events that, you know, I don't even like going to, you know, with the bar that I, I just, yeah, I don't, I don't enjoy a lot of the, the social, public stuff as much as some, and so how, how would a specific judge on the third floor in the upper divisions know that what the ones downstairs are doing and be aware of it and be complicit in it? I, I don't know how much.

ChristineI don't think they have a duty to seek out that information. Right. Like, I don't think they have a duty to go to someone's courtroom and watch how they conduct business. But I do think once something is told to them once, twice, a hundred times, they have an absolute duty to look at it differently.

HughYou know, when that happened, I went to another judge, um, who I had a lot of respect for, I won't name her name here, just because I,

ChristineI

got you. I haven't,

HughI haven't talked to her about it. And then being involved in this, I, you know, whatever. She was keenly interested. She told me how to go get the, uh, I don't remember if the videos were, if the DVD [00:28:00] system was pretty new back then. I mean, this was quite some time ago. Yeah. But told me exactly what to do, what to look at, and to come to talk to her about it. At the time, she was the chief judge and it changed while my case was, uh, up in front of the Supreme Court. Fantastic. Really interested that this stuff was going on. Wanted to see what happened. Like I. I, I am not talking about just paying lip service. I'm talking about really concerned that that was going on, on the bench there. So I Well, that's great to hear. I think, and I have no idea. That's why I don't want to, I don't want to raise any names, be I, I don't know how much she had to do with the case moving outta that judge's division. Yeah. It would not shock me if that's what she was doing behind the scenes to protect. Right. But also I know that even the chief judge position over there doesn't really have power over the other judges. No. So none of the judges have, while they may have an obligation to report certain things that they know specifically about, um, they don't have any power themselves to do anything about it,

Christinewhich I mean is in and of itself though, the bigger problem, like these are the people that are in charge of making all the [00:29:00] decisions. About our lives. I mean, taking away all of your constitutionally protected rights to parent, to liberty. I mean, you can incarcerate people, take their property, take their finances, take their children, and it's just, well, it's a hard system, you know? Or, well, it's not their job, and it's just, if this is the best we can do, we should just give up.

HughYeah. I mean, who looks, I mean, we have that at all levels of government. The people that are the top, that make the biggest decisions don't necessarily have someone that's micromanaging and is able to determine. I mean, there, there, let's say you go to the, the state legislature. How much does one person, maybe on one side of the aisle know about what the other people are doing behind the scenes if they catch them, or do you know? They, they have evidence of something. Certainly they raise it, but,

Christinewell, I mean, Mitch McConnell was dancing to explicit language at a Christmas party. It's gonna be all over the media.

HughYeah. The media's different though. The media. Okay. So to a certain extent, the, I mean, the media [00:30:00] is an important part of our political system for shining lights on things. Yeah. But they also know that Mitch McConnell dancing to, uh, a, a song that, that uses inappropriate language is going to get views and people are gonna be interested in it a lot more than a judge talking to one person. And while no one else is present on a, I mean, it just, it isn't interesting. I don't, so, well,

ChristineI don't think so. I think people will, here's open, eat this up. I mean, I think people will be like, you have actual proof, and it, it validates them. I think it's very similar to police brutality. Like I think that that was percolating for years and years, and there's this conversation about it that's happening and then all of a sudden, 2020 we're all locked down. We got those three cases. Yep. And everyone, it validates their feelings. And I think it's, it does. And then the judges have gotten outta control

Hughby the time 2024 rule rolled around, people have forgotten all about it. And I, I don't know. I, I'm hoping that there will be a larger. Longer term interest in, in this kind of stuff. And in fact, I'm banking on it and I'm, I'm making it, you know, [00:31:00] something that I'm, I'm willing to, uh, to work hard on. But I, you know, the police brutality thing that was so deflating to me that there was just this whole movement and everyone's eyes were open to it. And then the, the, the term that was used for, labeling yourself as aware that the system is broken, becomes a bad word, and no one wants to associate it with messaging with it, it's like, wow, this, it can turn that quickly. And programs that are meant to avoid that kind of stuff are now taboo and, uh, illegal in some places. So.

ChristineThat's the money machine, the political machine. That's why go back to your beginning of this podcast or this conversation. Why did Joan wanna talk and be a source for the media? 'cause if you're a source for the media, you can control the narrative in all instances.

HughYeah. And if something happens in the future, they're gonna go to you. Well, it's true. But I mean, I, I will say that I worked on her camp, the campaign that she won to be on that [00:32:00] term. I, I don't know how many, how many, uh, terms she served. 'cause she was on the bench when I started practicing here in Louisville. Well, one of the things I liked is she was very shrewd. She had no problem saying what her opinions were at all. I, it's one of the things I respected about her when I first, uh, started, when I got to know her off the bench, was that she's just very plain spoken. And I, you know, it was just always, uh, did you ever ask her about the ex parte thing? Personally? Personally? Yeah. No, 'cause I, I, I, uh, chose, I, I was angry enough about it, um, and basically giving up my. Practice in one out of 10 divisions here in the county where I work. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That I, once I was able to get past that, I just didn't, I didn't wanna revisit it. And I've just avoided interactions, um, because it's just, uh, it's, it's still, it's still hard for me to even think about having a conversation about it. I would be, I would be so angry because there isn't, there isn't anything that could [00:33:00] be said. There's nothing that could change my mind about it. It was blatant, just blatant, this is what it is. It's black and white. You did this. There's not gray area. There's not, oh, it's because of this, or there's exigent circumstances, none of that. There's no emergencies. There was nothing. You just, you just did a favor for somebody that you liked and, and

Christinethen you've been on her campaign, so it's not like you've even got any loyalty there. You know what I mean? But yeah, I've reached out to the person that ex parte, um, that was an attorney at the time, and that is, uh, now a judge.

HughAnd I was thinking when she, when that happened on that case, I thought, oh, just, yeah. Wow. Well, and I think that they've gotten so quote unquote powerful. And by powerful I mean small fish in a big pond or what's the saying? Is it big fish in a small pond? Yeah, big fish in a small pond. Pond. But a lot of people, a lot of my followers think that you get loyalty that their favorites attorneys and stuff like that.

ChristineAnd there may be, but generally speaking, they're just yelling at all of us at this point. Well, the funny thing is there, there's been some divisions I've walked in and I've had, this is especially true on the [00:34:00] court appointed dockets, right? So if you're going in on dependency, neglect and abuse or paternity or something like that, and the judge has the same attorneys that represent the kids, the parents, and they're in front of the judge all the time, and you come in, um, especially on like a dependency, neglect, and abuse docket.

HughMost cases, the great, great, great majority of cases don't have private attorneys from outside of that system. They're either pro se or they're a party that automatically gets an attorney appointed and they're from that group that always practices in front of that judge. So I would step in, someone would have the money to retain private counsel to come in and fight 'cause things weren't going the way they were supposed to go, or it was taking five times longer than the statute allowed or something like that. So I, would get involved in those cases from time to time and I would come into these divisions and someone would pull me aside. People that I was friendly with, that also worked on that docket that would tell me, watch out. I saw that you were bringing this motion. We've all been talking about it. We saw it come through on this docket. You know, the judge really loves this person is [00:35:00] gonna do whatever she says. Across the board. So you may want to think about asking for it in a different way or trying to present it a different way because you're always gonna lose this because of this person has favor with this judge and just gets relied on all the time. And whatever she says will, will go no matter how outlandish it is. And sure enough, it seemed to be, you know, the next year or so, yeah, I, I would see things like that happen and then all of a sudden I would be told that, that there was a falling out and that the, the opposite would be happening. And that, that, then I started noticing them fighting like an old married couple up at the bench. And I'm just thinking, I know that kind of stuff does happen. Yeah. but from a, you know, from a practitioner point of view, knowing that I know how to prepare my client Yeah. So there's certain, I I kind of, you know, it goes back to that thing about knowing what you're getting instead of having these things decided by a, an unpredictable jury, but like, so dependency, neglection, abuse, the best way I would describe it for anybody that's [00:36:00] curious is like, it's CPS cases, right?

ChristineYeah. So it's like if the Cabinet for Health and Family Services is involved, there's an allegation they're gonna offer services, they're gonna remove kids. That's it. And so most of the, like the way our statutes work is everybody gets appointed an attorney and the taxpayers pay and it's flat rate. Okay. Very different than what you see when we're talking about some of these court appointed people billing out early. But rarely, if ever do private attorneys go on those dockets. Mm-hmm. I mean, I'm in, in my career, in Jefferson County, I would say maybe five, maybe 10. I, you know, I, and there could be more, but just not my, not my jam. I didn't wanna sit around all day. Um, you didn't wanna get homecooked. And it's also just depressing. All three. Very accurate. Yeah. So like I, this is how I would describe dependency neglection abuse court. You've got babies addicted to drugs. you've got caregivers, you know, physically abusing children. You have children overdosing after getting access to drugs you [00:37:00] have, or being addicted upon birth. Yeah. Uh, and you have, you know, a baby that you, they can't find placement for because a family member can't take them. I mean, it is just the worst of the worst. Debbie Downer, you know, beyond the pale. but when you talk about how somebody gets favor in that court, you know, these are significant constitutionally protected rights that are being messed with because maybe one social worker, or maybe one GAL is in, is a favorite that day, right?

HughNo, absolutely. So, uh, the, there was a fundamental right to parent your. Child, I could. Um, and I know that our legislators in Kentucky realized that were prob there were problems on these dockets because they changed the law to protect to a certain extent the rights of foster parents to become parties to a case and have a [00:38:00] say in the case once they reached an adoption stage. Whereas historically, the foster parents still in the DNA, stage of the case, prior to there being an adjudication, and then, a determination that it's moving toward adoption. They still don't have any say in anything. They're the ones doing all the heavy lifting. They're the ones raising the kid. They're the ones bonded with the child. They're the ones going to bat taking time off work. Showing up for every court appearance. They have no say, they don't get, they don't, they're not represented. They don't have, any rights in the cases. That change in the law, indicates that somebody knew that the system wasn't working all that well. But I don't, in my opinion, it didn't go far enough. Because what I see is a court and then this select set of attorneys that represent every parent and or child in that division. At least the accused ones not the [00:39:00] caregivers. they're not entitled to the representation distinction. Yeah. The, foster parents don't get representation. The people that are accused, and there are important constitutional reasons for that. But when the judge is reliant on this same group of attorneys over and over again, and they just, and they're socializing With them, and I hear from attorneys that are on these dockets, talk about the conversations they've had about my cases with the judge, and have told me to my face that, oh yeah, when I talk to the judge about this and I'm thinking. You're not allowed to do that. But I know what's happening all the time. And some of these attorneys just walk in the back. And they, enter the courtroom every single time from the judge's office, from chambers as if they're part of the judicial staff. And it's just, they become that much of the system that I think it, I, when I come into those cases as a private attorney, I'm representing someone that doesn't have an court appointed attorney. It's rare that anyone that gets a court appointed attorney is [00:40:00] going in. In those cases where I know that there are plenty of people that could get a public defender, criminal cases, maybe they will Change and hire an attorney. That doesn't really happen in dependency, neglect, and abuse very often. So when I'm coming in, I was always coming in for someone that doesn't have a right to a court apparent appointed attorney. So they're usually the people doing the hard work, the friend, the family member, the foster parent who has stepped up to take on a child. Now, I, usually couldn't represent the foster parents 'cause they're not parties. Until it got to the adoption stage. But representing fictive kin cases, representing grandma who is the one that's raised the child since it came home addicted to cocaine from the hospital. Those are the people that would come in and represent and it was so clear so many times I would be there waiting around. As you said, there's always waiting. You show up, it's a cat hours cattle call. They, discuss the cases in cha in, in, conference rooms. Then they slowly, once the case has [00:41:00] been decided on or can't be decided on, has to have a hearing, it goes in front of the judge and it just sits in a pile and they get called one at a times the number of times where things have been called and discussed. And no one comes to get me because they just, the group talks about 'em. Oh yeah, I don't get invited in there. I'm representing a party. I have a right to every single discussion. They go in, they put it in front of the judge, they have the judge sign something. And my client doesn't even get to know that the discussion's taking place and you're excluded from it.

ChristineOkay, so this is Jefferson County. This is a Jefferson County thing.

Hughit's not just Jefferson County.

Christineit's a Jefferson County thing in the sense that there is this closed courtroom. Okay. Everywhere I, when, like when I practiced in Eastern Kentucky, domestic violence, like everyone comes into the courtroom and they just call the cases. Yeah.

HughThat's different. Domestic violence is different. That's not a sealed docket. True. It's treated as No, no, no. True confidential here. But

Christineso I used to sit in on all of the dependency neglection, abuse dockets when I was public defender. 'cause I was a juvenile public defender. They were on, they were J cases, they were on the same day. We didn't have a family court. I see. [00:42:00] So. You would see. You never had any of that. Like they would call the cases and it would be conference during a conference time. There wasn't that level of ex parte that I ever saw. Like even with private attorneys that would come in, uh, where Louisville is very different in that regard. Louisville is very much like this is a closed circuit. We're not letting anybody else in, in, in my experience,

HughI, I can think of two other counties where I've seen just the blatant ex parte stuff, bullet, like where the, maybe, maybe one, um, where the GAL on, you know, three quarters of the cases that I ever practice on would be, you know, on breaks would be in the back, hanging out with the judicial staff now. Do I know that they're back there talking about the case? No, I don't. Do I think that my client could ever in a million years think the judge is, um, fair is is objective on that case? Mm-hmm. And isn't speaking to an attorney who represents a party in that case when they both walk [00:43:00] out together after each break? No, it is just the, even just the appearance is, was so bad. So they're doing that on the record, like your client saw it? Oh, sure. Well, it's not on the record 'cause we haven't gone back on the record yet. Yeah, you haven't pushed your buddy. We're taking a break. Everyone walks out. Some people walk to the back and I can think of, I know two counties off the top of my head where it was just regular practice. A GS had maybe like a desk back there with the staff attorney. Yeah. And they, it's almost like their judicial staff and they're an attorney representing the children regulated by the same rules. And the judge has to treat them like every other attorney on the case. But I know that, that, you know, I, I know that it's happening and I. Frankly, it gets talked about enough. I've had enough conversations with people that have acted in that role, that talk about how often they talk with the judge.

ChristineWell, that's another thing that's concerning, is how often these, uh, third parties, um, jails, FOCs will say like, I mean, I had one blatantly tell me, there's no way the judge is gonna believe that person [00:44:00] over me. And I thought that is an insane thing to say out loud.

HughDo you know what I mean? Oh, yeah. But I mean, I, I can think of a, a small handful of people, one really in particular where I know that that's the case. The judge is just, I mean, it, the same person that, uh, judge Gatewood in the ad case ask, you know, basically, you know, what are we doing here? And they, you hear that same language. So what are we doing here? And then this one person that's been appointed by the judge says what we're doing here.

ChristineOh, yeah, yeah, yeah. I've seen that on the record, but I've never seen, I, it's bizarre to say it like behind the scenes

Hughuhoh. Uh, but I, I couldn't talk about cases and without bringing up an anecdote about some judges had done some something horrible. I was carrying a huge grudge because of I saw how it affected my clients Yeah. And their children. And the children they were taking care of and, and how it did. And I just, it consumed me. It, it was just terrible.

ChristineDoesn't it bother you though? Like, how many people are lawyers that aren't willing to speak up? Oh,

Hughoh, that kills me. I, [00:45:00] there are attorneys that I have great respect for their intellectual ability, their ability to practice, who have. Come to me and said, oh, you know, I, I can't believe, I'm glad you filed that motion. I never could have would've taken a judge on like that. 'cause how, how would it affect, you know, the next time you went in front of him and all of this. And I, and my response is always like, I represent my client. Yeah. I can't, I can't not fight for my client when a judge does something blatantly wrong and it costs my client custody or hundreds of thousands of dollars and it's, it's vindictive. I am not allowed to say, well, the judge will get mad at me if I do something about it and then sell my client out by not speaking up and doing something. But I think that is not practicing your case. And you're, you're violating your duty as an attorney.

ChristineA hundred percent. Like, it's like, did you just hear yourself out loud? You said I wouldn't advocate for my client. Yeah, because the judge is. Would get mad at me.

HughThat's exactly right. Well, and that's what happened. Me, I wouldn't take on a judge.

ChristineYeah. I mean, that is 100% what happened in my situation. [00:46:00] And I still sometimes am just like shocked at the whole, it was just so obvious, you know, that any attorney could realize that situation could have happened to them,

Hughyou know? And, and I mean, I I will say it was a much bigger deal the first time I had to do it. Yeah. Because, oh yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, when I was a young attorney and I mean, my income to my family was critical. Yeah. And there was definitely going to be a change in what cases I could take and what I couldn't. And it was before I had a practice with, you know, 20 ish attorneys that I could shuffle cases around and I could just not practice in front of a judge for a while and send someone else in there, couldn't do that. It was like, you're not gonna make any money on this percentage of cases. I, I mean, I've, it is not an easy thing to have to do, but it is also. Very clear what is right and wrong. Murder is very clear. What I have to do in my duty to my client doesn't mean it's easy.

ChristineYeah. I mean, I don't have children obviously, and so I can't imagine I have the flexibility, [00:47:00] um, to not have that dependency. You know what I mean? So when I was done with it, I was just like, I'm not gonna participate in this. And I, you know, it's hard to think about from that standpoint, but I've always been of the mentality there are more of us than there are them. I, I don't understand the fear

Oh yeah.

ChristineOf authority. Like these family court judges, especially in Louisville, like, or even some of the judges in Louisville. I'm trying to think of the best way to say this. I just wasn't raised to be scared of lazy people. I mean, you, you should be scared of some judges in Eastern Kentucky. Okay. I mean, they're hard workers. They're connected. There are systems there, there are things. But are you like scared? Uh, am I scared of any Louisville judge? No. No.

HughLike

Christineintellectually, physically,

HughI wasn't worried about that. I was worried and given how quickly when I did it, how many people came out and said that they, you know, they were glad I spoke out and they, the stories I heard, um, that people that had been through the same thing mm-hmm. Even when I [00:48:00] was, you know, much younger attorney and I was just, just fighting for the biggest client at the time I had ever had.

Yeah.

HughI didn't realize, you know, that this was going on and so often, and I think a lot of it isn't just out of fear. I think there's just complacency. Mm-hmm. I think it's, so much of it is this is the system we practice in front of. If most of the judges are gonna do this and this is just gonna keep happening. Yep. It just doesn't seem like to me, maybe I was way too idealistic. Um, and the previous crop of judges, we did have some people that I. They seemed like the judge that's in your head when you're in law school. Yeah. Yeah. But when that stays above it all, everybody has their quirks, everyone has their issues. But you came in and you came in with res, you treated the judge with respect. The judges treated everyone else with the respect. Like you could have been having a conversation, you know, you could have run into each other at the lobby and just been shooting the crap about something that [00:49:00] you're both interested in or be friends. But when you walked in that courtroom mm-hmm. It was very formal and all of that went away. And that was just when you saw a judge do something as a favor to someone else, ex parte completely against the rules, it seemed like it was just this shining error that had to be addressed. Yeah. And I think that nowadays. How many, how many things have you heard in the last 48 hours that people have told you that this is going on or that's going on? How many emails have we received where people just outline the, oh, this happened yesterday or the day before? This is just part of the system and I think the attorneys see it so often. It just becomes something you have to account for, something you just have to tell your client about. Um, back before, and you stopped practicing, um, when they still did assignment in Jefferson County of Cases based on last name. Yes. So you could sit down at an initial meeting and say, okay, your last name is this. Here's who you're gonna be in front of. Oh yeah. Here's how your case is gonna go. When that went away, oh man, [00:50:00] that was the, the, my consultations had to be longer because I would say, okay, this kind of case, if you end up over here, here's how I could see it going. If you end up here, we're not ever going inside the courtroom and it's worth spending some money to, to settle on something, to not go in front of this judge. And, but I don't know which one you're gonna be in front of. It became so much harder. But that's only because we just accepted it as part of the system. Yeah. It's some part of what we had to navigate,

Christineso, okay. I have no idea because I, in Louisville, which the other county judges would get mad about this, but it was always the mom's last name is how your divorce was filed.

HughYeah. And then there's some new rules that came in after Obergefell and Yeah. And we were divorcing people of same gendered couples. Oh, for sure. It was the petitioner.

ChristineYeah. Yeah.

HughYeah.

ChristineUm, but when it changed, like, and you, so when you go in and you get hired, you know, we fi we file the petitioner, we draft everything up, and then you go to court net and you hit that click button, right? Yeah. Do you get assigned that second or is it like the next day?

HughI don't know. I, oh, you have asked. I'm embarrassed to say that I haven't [00:51:00] filed a case in many years. I believe that it creates an envelope, uhhuh, it doesn't get assigned immediately, but then you know how, uh, you file, uh, pleadings, you'll pretty quickly get something out that says it's been accepted or there's something similar with your case and it'll have a file stamped. Copy that you can download of all the pleadings that you filed at the initial part of the case. And it has the division on it. So we knew, I knew very quickly, quickly, okay. Uh, we had it, we had flagged who we got in front of and it was part of the scuttlebutt in the office that if you had a case that had a specific issue and everyone knew it would be, you're gonna be in for it. If we get run into this division, everyone was talking about it. I, I would always find out, 'cause I'd hear some people in my office talking about, oh my gosh, I can't believe we got this judge on the stage. I could just

Christinehear the curse words coming outta my mouth if I filed like a divorce, you know, low asset divorce and you drew division seven, like, I'd have to get out. I don't know. I need to look into that.

HughI, uh, yeah, [00:52:00] I, there are certain ones that if we were going to have to try more complex issues and want to really put a lot of evidence in and have the judge rule on the evidence and establish a good record, there's certain judges I'd wanna be in front of, even if they were things that they did that I think. I appreciate if you, I don't have to wait six months for a hearing and I can get into front of you very quickly, but I also don't wanna have to argue in front of someone that's just going to yell at me.

ChristineI don't know. I think when you're two years outta that too, it's like your job is to hear my case. Yeah. Your job is to hear my case and all of the things. You gotta buy circuit time. You've gotta do this. Why do you wanna be a judge if you don't want to adjudicate the case? Like sometimes I wonder why they want us to settle so badly now. Not that I don't think you should settle as opposed to going to court. But like, don't they like, like the law

Hughknow, like if you were judge,

Christinewouldn't you wanna be in court?

HughSome judges hate having hearings. Wow. And it's so obvious they will put it off. Anybody has the slightest thing. Well, I have a conflict. I'm trying to move. [00:53:00] Well, I think you might not be able to move it, so maybe we should just go ahead and reschedule and just like having do, that's not how continuances work. Yeah. There are rules. There are things that have to happen. Quit having, uh, hearings and, and there was one in particular in the, in our last, uh. You know, I say crop of judges that the, the judges that are were before the judges that are currently on the bench, who would just, everyone would get there. It would be for a trial. You might've been fighting over these issues. You might've had two or three hearings. You can't resolve 'em. You've had Yeah. Mediations, you've had settlement conferences. You were there to try it because the courts for any reasonable people are a place of last resort. Yeah, yeah, yeah. If you can settle your stuff and handle things like a responsible human, uh, if you can get two responsible, rational human beings, they shouldn't have to be in court. Right. There's a reason why something's happening, or every now and then, everyone is calm and rational and you just have an interesting legal issue mm-hmm. That no one knows. But that's rare. These [00:54:00] people were in court 'cause they were never going to get this settled. And it happened time and time again. This judge would always call counsel in to chambers and there's nothing wrong with it because they're talking to everybody. Yeah. Yeah. Um. And, and not saying there's anything wrong with that, but it was just strong arm into settling. And I practiced in, uh, federal court when I first moved, uh, to Louisville in, in 2005. And they would do the same thing. They'd sit down, why are we having this, why are we having this hearing? Why are we gonna have to call a jury on this issue? Here are the numbers. I think it's probably worth now the jury's gonna make a decision later, but maybe you should go get your case settled. And it was effective. Mm-hmm. It worked. They didn't have any say. They couldn't actually decide that, but they had an interest in freeing their docket up and they could look. And, you know, sometimes I think a judge can see the bigger picture than I know when I was, um, a litigant, it was hard for me to step back and see the bigger picture. One of the things I loved about working as on a team of people, I had people that were not down in the weeds of a case and could tell me, maybe I'm getting lost [00:55:00] on this. Yeah. And I need to, I need to step back. I think sometimes. The judge has that role, but there are some of them that just do it all the time. 'cause they never want to have to sit there and sit through a hearing. And at least that's my opinion. But it becomes so clear that you just don't wanna make a decision on this. You don't want to hear it out.

ChristineYeah. And I think, um, just like our family court releases their docket, like our district court judges won't even do that. I think, there may be hell on, there's no one on the bench right now. It's probably four o'clock, so everybody's been home for two hours, allegedly. But, I digress when I pull, I've been pulling all of the weekly dockets and I've gone to see when the hearings are scheduled and then you go to court net to see if there was a hearing.

Sure.

ChristineHow many times do you think those hearings were resolved? A lot. but I think they do it to just be like, Hey, I'm working. Like I found one that was submitted by an agreed order like three weeks prior and it was still like a half day trial.

HughIt's still on the calendar. yeah, Now I, to be fair, there, I have.[00:56:00] There's been a couple judges that I've talked to, man, it's been a while, but it judges that I practiced in front of, earlier in my career, you spent a lot of time in chambers and they would sit down with both attorneys and you would have conversations and you would try to work things out and the judge would want to get an idea of what the issues were before going in. I thought it was really helpful because you felt you didn't have to start the big picture and spell out the issues for the judge, which if the judge, I mean as a smart practitioner, you're going to start high level and then work into the details, but it, you get limited time and family court, you are supposed to get half the time, the allotted time. So if a judge brought us in and we could get to the chase, cut to the chase and their whole role was to go in there and you put on the factual evidence and make your argument, I always appreciated that. I was surprised. in the past when we would get things settled, the judge, the judges would be like.[00:57:00] That's fantastic. I'm gonna leave it on the docket because I am so backed up with orders, getting orders out. So I know some of them would just leave it blocked off to get their work done. I didn't really have a problem on No. 'cause I was probably waiting

ChristineNope, nope. Waiting for

Hughorders. But also

Christineyou work for me, you are a taxpayer. I wanna know how often you're in court, period. Yeah,

HughI, think, I, can't say I disagree with you on it, but I did see them getting caught up, whereas they could have taken it off the docket and just, they have control in the ability to not schedule anything. They could have just done it in a different way, but a lot of them I know. So in the latter years of my career, I was getting involved more and more on some of the confidential cases or I would have confidential cases that were, because they were high profile. They were sealed, whether they should have been or not. my, my opinion as a member of the public is different [00:58:00] than as an advocate for one of the sides, and it has to be right. but I pretty regularly had to go over, to the court to get a judge to sign something to allow me to see a case file. So we regularly, as There is a form, it's an order that goes into the case that says this person and would name my name. I would fill it out the affidavit and, sign it. And then the judge would sign it as an order and it would say, I have an interest that should allow me to examine that case file. And it may not allow me to take any of it or copy it or do anything else, but that either someone's retained me or I have an interest in it. And I would have to go looking for a, just to do that. And how many times I went around and I could see what was on the door. Yeah. And they would have their dockets posted and there would be a hearing, and there that door would be locked, the lights would be off. It was clear. There's no hearing. Now, did it cancel right before I. We canceled hearings. We, cases settle right before, so some of those times, I'm sure it canceled right before, and they [00:59:00] had printed that thing out the day before, but there's nobody there. But the thing is, and I couldn't find, yeah, I would have to go on all, every single time, unless I got lucky, I'd have to go at least on ev all three floors looking for one judge to be there on an afternoon.

Christinethey have police, there's law enforcement that are trying to get warrants signed and signed in district court. And there's no one,

Hughthere's just nobody there. I'm not familiar with how, it is in district court. It was, oh, our local district court, wa practice was just a standard protect practitioner. You had your nine o'clock rounds, you went and did your cases at nine, you did your one o'clock, and you were gone way before the, workday closed over there and you were back at your office doing other things. So I rarely, if ever had to find judges over there. I can't even think of circumstances where I had to actually find judges.

ChristineI think that's what, like judgey talking about why we're doing this. I think judgey can just go to court and see if it's Tuesday, let's pick a time for next week. Tuesday. Pick a time during the workday, not [01:00:00] during lunch. You pick one random day. Oh, just

Hughlike one 30. Yeah.

ChristineOkay. It was 1:30 PM on a Tuesday. Let's go to the courthouse. So you was there and let's see how many of the 37, 39 judges there are, right? Wait. 13, 10. 16, right. 39.

HughYep.

ChristineHow many do you think? Let's make a bet.

HughOh gosh. my experiences with family court and maybe it's the same across you. I always, am naive enough to think, oh, it's better in other, courts. And then when I practice in front of them, I realize this is just how it works. other counties too, other jurisdictions, I, practice in multiple, states. I. I, but I, yeah, I, if I was gonna base it on the percentage I would think in, family court, I'd say, oh man, at one o'clock on a one 30 Tuesday, one 30 is early enough.

ChristineHow sad is this whole conversation right now? Oh, I

Hughknow, but I would say between 50 and

Christine60%.

HughIf you got up [01:01:00] to three 30 or four and you asked me it would be a totally different number.

ChristineI think we need to give them like some grace, so we need to just pick a time and then go, like at different weeks. But I would say that I would bet of the 39 judges, I would say, because it is a Tuesday, so if you get into Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays too, you're gonna have less

HughFriday, let's say Friday at three o'clock.

Christinefour judges maybe. I would say that there'll be 12 judges at the courthouse

Hughat one 30 on a Tuesday. Oh, I think I'd take that bet.

ChristineYou think more

HughI do, but I. I don't know that I'd bet a lot of money on it. I was

Christinejust say, yeah, we can bet a beer. I think this will be fun. I think this is the kind of stuff though that judges should do because what if you, what if I'm crazy? You know what? If you're crazy and these judges are working 60 hours a week, let's, and they're at the courthouse. Let, that's what I mean. Let see. And

Hughif

Christinewe're

Hughwrong, then let's report it and let's tell everyone I apologize. Like

ChristineI will apologize until the cows come in.

HughI agree. and frankly, if you're not there [01:02:00] and all of your orders are out, and as a practitioner, I've gotten everything back that I should have and you've completed your hearing and you want to give your staff the afternoon off and be nice and you're gone. You may not be doing what you're supposed to be doing, but I don't know that I've got a problem with it. I agree. My issue is if you are a judge and I've been waiting eight months for something, And a kid can't, we can't get a kid enrolled for medical care or something. We've been waiting eight months. And I cannot find you. No matter what. And we cannot get a hearing in front of you for a month and you're just not at work. that's a huge problem. Huge. It's a huge failure of what, the public, of their service to the public.

ChristineOh, this is gonna be fun. Okay. All right. Well, I feel like we should be at a wrap for today.

HughGetting ourselves deeper and deeper into trouble.