![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.t-g.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (22)
Share link
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
GoogleBut Rich says that the serious nature of the case and the interests of the child were the reasons behind the delay.
The reprimand stems from a complaint filed by attorney Timothy Underwood and states that Rich violated two Canons of the Code of Judical Conduct, which establish standards for ethical conduct of judges.
The letter, which was issued Monday, concerns Rich's actions in hearing a Lincoln County Juvenile Court case in which Christa Badenhop Garrett sought the custody of her child.
According to the letter of reprimand from Don R. Ash, presiding judge of the Court of the Judiciary, the letter was signed "pursuant to your agreement with the Investigative Panel of this Court."
Ash wrote that in 2004, Rich had "agreed to interchange with the Lincoln County General Sessions Judge to hear matters relating to the minor child involved in this litigation."
Garrett, who is the natural mother of the child in question, filed a petition seeking to be restored to custody of the child and on July 18 of last year, Rich heard the petition and "took the matter under advisement."
However, Ash wrote that Rich made no ruling on the custody petition and that attorney Underwood wrote the judge in October 2008 seeking the status of the decision in the case.
"You took no action," Ash wrote. "In December of 2008 Mr. Underwood wrote again seeking to determine the status of the case. Again you took no action in deciding the case."
Underwood's complaint to the Disciplinary Council of the Court, "that was based on your failure to to decide this important custody matter" was received on Jan. 26 of this year.
"You were immediately given notice of the complaint," Ash stated. "However, you failed to decide this case until March 6, 2009, approximately eight months from the time of its submission to you."
Ash wrote that Rich's refusal to decide the case in a timely fashion caused Garrett to "expend additional legal fees and efforts to obtain a decision in this case," calling his actions "a violation of Canon 2 A requiring a judge to know and follow the law."
The letter also says that Rich also violated Canon 3 B (8), which requires a judge "to depose of all judicial matter promptly, efficiently, and fairly."
Ash goes on to say that Rich's conduct "is detrimental to the administration of justice and brings the judiciary into public disrepute ..."
"In the future you are to explicitly follow the Code of Judicial Conduct and to decide promptly case which are submitted to you," Ash wrote.
In a statement from Rich received via e-mail Tuesday, he said, "In 2004, I agreed to sit on a child custody case in Lincoln County, Tennessee. There were approximately four (4) hearings between 2004 and July 18, 2008, with a final hearing on that date, which involved numerous witnesses."
"At the hearing, a significant conflict developed in the testimony, and I took the matter under advisement in order to allow the parties an opportunity to file additional pleadings with the court," the judge said.
"Following the additional filings by the parties, I began my decision making process. Due to the serious nature of the case and my concern for the best interests of a child, I took longer than I would ordinarily take in deciding a case," Rich explained. "The Court of the Judiciary, who monitors the conduct of the judges felt that I took too long to render my decisions.
"I chose not to contest the Court's finding, and the matter is now concluded," Rich said.
This is the second time in less than a year that Rich has received a public letter of reprimand.
Last October, Rich was reprimanded by the Court of the Judiciary for refusing to make a finding of fact in a child support case, which delayed the mother's ability to make an appeal in the case.
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
This judge is a joke. Nuff Said!
At least he finally ruled. I bet this might make the upstairs jugde get off his high horse and finish some cases. You better bet that I will tell everyone that I know to file a complaint because they are unhappy on the time frame. If you want to see a joke for a judge you can see another one handing down DUMB rulings on the third floor. Beware he has a case now fixing to blow up in his face and he doesn't even see it coming.
It's definitely time some of the judical figures in our great county are brought down a notch or two. Spend anytime in the court room here and you'll see what a joke it is! Buddy system!
Boss Hogg?
This just goes to show that WE are in dire need of a judge that knows what his job is and how important it is that things get dealt with within a timely matter ! What would have happened to the child if he/she wasn't being cared for the right way ? Also , I have been in the courtroom while he presided and to tell you the truth he's not Fair to everyone ! Just put it this way , two guys go in front of him for the same charge and walk away with different sentences ! Where's the justice in that ? It's all about how well you know him personally ! He definatly needs to be investigated !!!
This fellow reprimanding judge needs to look and follow tca codes himself instead of doing favors for his buddies n criminal cases and taking off n middle of a case been rumored n near future he might have problems himself with doj
I'd say this fellow disclipinary judge needs sanctions put on him from wat I read @fox memphis, this fellow don't follow tca codes either, been rumored he was n bed with another atty on a criminal case and took off n middle of a hearing,to which he stated to newspaper months later he's never took off n middle of a hearing, the good ole buddy system not only in bedfore but neighboring co also, been rumored n near future this fellow might have problems with some cases himself
glad he finally got in trouble for this. He does this all the time in order to favor on behalf of the good ol boy system. i hope he loses his job. many families have lost out on the lives of children under his rule. he needs to lose his job as far as im concerned.We need Dugger back in the seat!
Seems this fellow judiciary judge might have problems himself with a case he was n bed on, the good oe boy network, talking about judge rich not actin appropriately , this fellow should look back on cases he's sit on.and not following statuates himself,
Instead of reprimanding charles rich, judge ash should look @ a case he took off on you talking bout the good ole boy network.been rumored he's being looked into
Remember folks...our judges are ELECTED OFFICIALS...WE get to say who is on the bench. If people would come out and support someone running against Rich, I bet someone would step up and run...problem is, none of the attorneys here in town will run because most of them have dealings with him at some point or another...they don't want to bite the hand that feeds them so to speak. Maybe we should recruit someone from a neighboring county?? Just a thought...
I'd vote for Dugger!!
Vote for Dugger???? That is ten times worse!!!!!
What are you people smoking???? Dugger needs to retire. He's a joke!
People can talk all they want, But Rich and Dugger, does there job like they see it need to be done. It better to take your time then to jump to a hasty decision. Does ever body remember Judge Taylor? People let him stay in office and he done his drugs and good ole girls.
I think people that talk about our Judges, maybe they been before the Judges, and they didn't like what they got.
in case judge rich is reading these comments...it would be very helpful to you to gain some public trust to do two things...1-make all the attorneys sit in the audience like everyone else,also police,the district attorneys should be on the floor with you alng with your other staff..2-when the d.a. is to speak with each individual after judge calls each person,this should be done in the same order and not with the attorneys bombarding the d.a.,private citizens have just as much right and have their jobs to get back to. i will say that having been in font of the judge on a matter concerning my child ...the judge did weigh in on what was best for the child he was very very helpful on staying on track and listening.
Don't be so hard on our Judge, What is the old saying "don't judge a person until you have walked in his shoes" Charles has had a lot on him. Yes, I have seen him make bad judgments, But, I have also seen him make good ones. It is not an easy job. He is going to make someone mad, no matter what desission he might make. He is young, give him a chance to grow. Widsom comes with age. You can't make everyone happy. I think he tries to follow the law, that is what it is all about. Don't let this get you down Charles. You are a good man.
I love Judge Rich and will vote for him AGAIN! That woman must have done something STUPID to have had her child taken away from her in the first place. Im sure he did the child a favor by keeping the child away from an irresponsible parent.
You can please all of the people some of the time, you can please some of the people all of the time, but you cant please all of the people all of the time....... ABRAHAM LINCOLN...... keep on doing what you thimk you need to do Charles, the liberals in this world will always think they have a better way of doing things thats why our goverment is so screwed up now. You will always have my vote and support.
I'm sure that the people that voted for Judge Rich would reconsider if they were to ever end up in his court. It doesn't seem hardly fair that the people that are cited to court, must be there @ 9am. However the judge shows up anywhere from 9:30 to 10 am. I guess when you is da judge, then you can show up, when you get good and ready to dispense justice...sorry couldn't write that and keep a straight face.
So if a person has a court case, and they have to be out of work that day, and they come to court and their case is not heard by the judge and they have to take another day from work to go to court, and again their case is not heard by the judge, after missing so many days of work to come to court a person will eigther loose their job or drop the case; What type of violation would you call that? What if it is a pattern which included the same attorney on the opposing side, what kind of system would that be called? Would this person be paying more money out to the court and attorney for each time they have to come back to court? What should a person do if that was done to them?
I like Charles Rich but he isn't a very good judge. He shows up when he feels like it, leaves when he feels like it and doesn't care what anyone thinks about it. You can never reach anyone in his office. You get an answering machine and no one ever returns the call. The people that are never in court have no idea what goes on in there. If they did, they wouldn't vote for him just cause he's a nice guy. Sometimes it takes someone with a stiffer jowl to be a judge. You are not going to please everyone all the time, but you should at least make a decision and hopefully a timely decision. The sad part is, there are no decent attorneys that will step up to run for this office to give us a choice. The only people to benefit from having him as a judge are the people doing wrong. Everyone gets probation, so why behave? Get in more trouble, get put back on probation...sorry but, loveable guy, deplorable judge.