A Bill to Amend ‘An Act to Establish General Rules of Procedure in the State Courts’ (R)

A Bill to Amend ‘An Act to Establish General Rules of Procedure in the State Courts’ ®


BE IT ENACTED BY THE STATE OF FIRESTONE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:

PREAMBLE: Rule 11, section c has lots of controversies to the rule itself. The law requires one to recuse a case in which the presiding judge shares the same department of an individual. Considering we have many people in different types of departments within Firestone, it is very challenging for our Judicial Branch to operate under such rule.

SECTION 1: “An Act to Establish General Rules of Procedure in the State Courts" shall be recognized in this legislation as the following: General Rules of Procedure in the State Courts Revision Act Part 1 General Rules of Procedure in the State Courts Revision Act Part 2

SECTION 2: Rule 11 of ‘An Act to Establish General Rules of Procedure in the State Courts’ currently states: “A judge shall not preside over a matter which involves (or any party related to the matter of hand is a member of) a department, agency, or other business entity in which him/herself is currently employed or in which they (the judge) has not been separated from for more than three months. This shall not include the prosecutor of a criminal case prosecuted by the Department of Justice, nor shall it include a matter where a member of the court itself is a party (unless the party is the justice themselves”

SECTION 3: Rule 11 of ‘An Act to Establish General Rules of Procedure in the State Courts’ shall now state:

"a) No judge may not be a witness or party to a matter that they are presiding over.

b) A judge shall recuse themselves from any matter in which:
i) There is a conflict of interest;
ii) or other good cause.

c) When a judge recuses themselves, they shall note such and the reason for recusal.

d) After a judge has recused themselves from a matter, they shall not hear the matter as a judge at any time forward.

i) Recusal may be taken back should it be found that no conflict of interest or other good cause existed. Otherwise, it may not be taken back.

e) A judge shall not hear and rule on a case in an inferior court and then hear and rule upon the same case in a superior court."

Respectfully submitted to the State of Firestone Congress,

CHIEF SPONSOR:

Senator Stamose

This topic was automatically closed after 1 minute. New replies are no longer allowed.