Contested Family Court case with appointed GAL. Informal hearing to decide custody, child support. Legal Knowledge: Absolutely horrendous refusal to abide by basic recognition of legal definitions and authenticity of clinical/expert witnesses. Fairness & Impartiality: Less than one star. The impartiality was nauseating, and verifiable grounds for appeal, and possibly judicial reprimand. Hazel's lack of impartiality has verifiable put two small children in imminent danger, all disregarded by Hazel during 2-day trial. Judicial Temperament: Two reluctant stars here. Superficially, the "demeanor" was relatively 'calm', but it was merely a facade for premeditated findings he inevitably would rule, despite evidence presented depicting various forms of abuse. Communication: None of Hazel's justifications for horrific findings made sense- logical or by legal definition. Timeliness: Court was delayed or canceled a plethora of times, with several of those times having less than 24hr notice to the pro se litigant. Hearings were delayed and based around everyone's benefit, EXCEPT that of the children and the pro se party.