Divorce- Child Custody and Division of Assets Communication: Very thick southern accent and hard to understand. Makes people sit and wait for decisions and court records because he’s so slow. Cuts you off before you get to finish talking. Legal Knowledge: Self proclaimed he does not enjoy doing divorce cases and has managed and continues to manage MANY divorce cases. Very biased and should be taken out of this sector. Has no understanding of what best interest of child means. Does not understand high conflict personalities and mental health issues. Thinks he knows IRS and tax laws and is ignorant. Forces litigants to file taxes according to his wishes and not how IRS laws are written. Is unfair with custody arrangements and marital assets distribution. Rules based on feelings instead of laws. Abuses his power. Fairness & Impartiality: Sad to say but is a misogynist. Totally biased towards women. Treats men fairly and punishes women. Thinks women are drama queens if they speak up and fight for truth or justice. Believes fathers rights are more important than best interest of the child. Punitive and retaliatory if you force him to apply the law based on your evidence. Has no patience for high conflict personalities and allows men to violate his court orders without any consequences. Believes the men deserve more money in marital disolution. Judicial Temperament: Very impatient and disinterested in divorce cases. Can’t handle high conflict divorces. Gets angry if he’s wrong and you try to correct him. Would rather have wrong information than face his ego. Very old and slow moving. Took forever to write a decree. Typical good ole boys network mentality. Friends with all the male county attorneys and talks about cases outside of the court. Is extremely prejudice especially if you are not from Tennessee or are a female with a career and have a good income. Extreme CORRUPT alert. Caught him putting a finding and accusation in a divorce trial decree that was never discussed in court on the stand or in the transcript. Litigant was never able to defend position against the false allegation. Proof he was colluding with the oppossing attorney outside of the court. Found out this judge and that attorney are very good friends. Should have been taken to Appelite court because this finding and accusation is NOT true. Timeliness: Because he is slow, it takes forever to get court hearings, decisions made, and records developed. Needs to retire. The court should get a younger new talent to replace him. Has very old school traditional thinking and is not modernized.