ipl-logo

The Impartiality And Independence Of Judge Jimbo Kern

1138 Words5 Pages

In this decision, the court will examine the impartiality and independence of judge Jimbo Kern. Judge J. Kern recently ruled on the case of Bebe v. Sharon and Randy. Bebe has reasonable believes that judge J. Kern has made based the outcome of the case on factors other than the facts and law.

There are two types of jurisdictions, in personam and in rem jurisdiction. In personam jurisdiction means that the decision of the judge is binding to a person while in rem jurisdiction. As the last judgement is between the owners of the fabulous inn and Bebe, it is binding upon people and therefore there is an in personam jurisdiction applicable.

The applicable legal provisions can be found in UNIDROIT Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure (PTCP), …show more content…

Kern has in the ruling of the case. It is known to the court that J. Kern holds a small number of shares of the Fabulous Inn property. This gives him financial disadvantage if he would rule in favor of Bebe as it would disadvantage the Fabulous Inn, where the incident happened.

The court has the obligation to be impartial, if there is reasonable ground to doubt a person’s impartiality, the decisional authority cannot participate in the process. Mainly, principle one states that ‘there should be a fair and effective procedure for addressing contentions of judicial bias’. Therefore there must be a fair procedure to see if the court’s decisional authorities are impartial or not. Impartiality could be a measured in a state of mind or even an attitude.

Judge J. Kern is a family member of Randy, his cousin. This creates a possibility to doubt impartiality and a possible bias. Not only that, the court also recognizes that J. Kern stated that Bebe and her friend Wendy should have stayed in France, addressing Bebe in a non-professional …show more content…

Health Services Acquisition Corp,. In this case, the judge would financially benefit if he ruled in favor of one of the parties. The judge was on the board of trustees of Loyola University, one of the involved parties. As this is an American case, it was ruled that 28 U.S.C was applicable, article 445(a): any justice, judge or magistrate of the United States of America shall disqualify himself in any proceedings in which impartiality might be questioned.

The similarity is between the judges and their personal interest. As where the judge in the case mentioned above was on the board of trustees, Mr. J. Kern holds shares of the Fabulous Inn. In the case, the judge was required to disqualify himself in any proceedings in which impartiality might be questioned. It did not have to be proved, just questioned.

Dutch legislation, NNVR-rechtcode supports the judicial independence, making it not a privilege enjoyed by judges but a citizen’s fundamental right under the rule of law in a democratic state. A judge must be able to make his judgement based on his own judgement, assessment of the law and facts, without inappropriate influence and that a judge should not accept any representative position because he is aware that it could create the appearance of

Show More
Related
1378 Words | 6 Pages

Making decisions as a judge and as a jury can be difficult. Kuehn v. Pub Zone and Soldano v. O’Daniels both involve attacks in a bar, yet the cases are very different. In Kuehn v. Pub Zone, a gang that frequented the Pub Zone assaulted Kuehn, the plaintiff. The defendant, Kerkoulas, knew of the danger posed by the gangs, Pagans, and banned the use of “colors.” The Pub Zone failed to enforce their ban at the time of the attack.

Read More
1235 Words | 5 Pages

After listening to both sides present their case the judge will issue a ruling on the defendant’s

Read More
416 Words | 2 Pages

I find myself writing you asking for guidance within the walls of the 12th Justice System. My daughter continues to be in the middle of ledge issues with the adopted mother of my granddaughter. However, this is a family matter, in which we will have to figure out on our end.

Read More
694 Words | 3 Pages

Proponents of Nevada's system of electing judges have argued that competitive election of judges is the most democratic way of ensuring that judges remain accountable to the people. Proponents add that elections affirm the electoral beliefs of candidates who present themselves for judicial positions. These arguments rest on the reality that judges cannot be politically neutral in their personal capacities. Rather than conceal the political penchants of judicial candidates, it is better to have them known. Such political inclinations can only be known through campaigns that precede judicial elections.

Read More
949 Words | 4 Pages

He states that judges should be independent, but if something unlawful happens a recall should take place. Kevin explains that recalls and minimum sentences prevent judges from opposing the law. Kevin points that judges should be recalled even if it is only one mistake. He asked several questions about the judge’s conclusion.

Read More
330 Words | 2 Pages

Four prominent law professors launched a formal complaint about this case and his decision back in September. They argue that cases like this often occur behind closed doors and frequently

Read More
776 Words | 4 Pages

A judge should be the only one able to decide a person’s fate because they use fact over feelings. For

Read More
462 Words | 2 Pages

When people think of a good judge they typically think of somebody who is fair, not bias and has some sort of experience. However, in today’s society, particularly in the United States, our judicial selection methods are not made to select judges on their ability to reason well and rule impartially (Carter and Burke, 6). On top of that, judges have no actual training before they become part of the judiciary. The only training they receive is in school when they are studying the law. Sometimes when they pursue an apprenticeship with a judge they also get a little bit more experience or insight into a judge’s job.

Read More
726 Words | 3 Pages

For example, an individual may connect to the person on trial by race, gender, ethnicity or commonality between the defendant and someone from their personal life. May also occur with events and situations being discussed on trial. Author Veronica Roth stated that “no matter how smart, people usually see what they 're already looking for, that 's all”, and this applies to the justice system in the sense that looking past the biases is and always will be difficult because one tends to ignore evidences because of overwhelming emotions from bias (Roth). It is ideal to have impartial jurors whom will seek to be fair and will endeavor to correct potential bias in the courtroom in themselves, but it is not logical.

Read More
465 Words | 2 Pages

A fair and unbiased court system is necessary for the legal system. The role of the court is to correct any injustice, not to compound it. When prejudice and corruption leak into the courts, what recourse do we have for eradicating them from society? Our judges must be stalwarts of integrity because the power to move our country forward or hold our country back often lies in their hands. Judge Persky had the power to bring justice to a victim, to help her and her family move forward.

Read More
207 Words | 1 Pages

One of the unique things about university of Maryland is our Student Judiciary. The USJ plays a vital role in maintaining the integrity, ethics, and character of the both the University and the students who attend it. But the without the students who take time out of their busy schedules to be part of it, the USJ would not be able to play such a strong role. By using college students rather than faculty, staff, or private sources to make decisions about the different cases on campus, we are allowing students to play a stronger role in the community. Each student in the USJ brings a different perspective to a case.

Read More
745 Words | 3 Pages

THE JURY: Trial and Error in the American Courtroom by Stephen J. Adler is a significant book on reforming the jury system. Alder is the legal Editor at the Wall Street Journal and has done several interviews with lawyers, judges and legal experts in order to better understand the current justice system and to find out solutions to the system’s faults. Alder starts off with a story of how a woman named Maude was acquitted by the jury after charges was set on her for pistol whipping a man who had sewn up her horse's mouth for eating his hay. Alder explains “Maude's case is quintessentially American, and it reveals what we imagine and want our jury system to be. It shows the little guy speaking for all of us, justice handed up from the community, not

Read More
606 Words | 3 Pages

In Edgar Lee Masters’ poem “Minerva Jones,” he writes about a young lady named Minerva. I learned that Minerva is a fat, cock-eyed girl who gets made fun of by people on the streets. The people she is speaking about are “Butch” Weldy, Doctor Meyers, and some villagers. Some villagers, which she refers to as Yahoos, don’t seem to take much liking to Minerva because of her appearance. She spoke about Butch like if he hurt her in some way by using phrases such as “Captured me after a brutal hunt.”

Read More
801 Words | 4 Pages

Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.

Read More
1333 Words | 6 Pages

Introduction The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 is an act made by Parliament of United Kingdom provided for the creation of a Supreme Court to take over the roles of law lords and the powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was devolved, removing the role of speakers in the House of Lords and the head of the Judiciary in England and Wales from the office of the Lord Chancellor. The act came into force in April 2006, has clearly delineate the separation of the judicial function from the other two bodies and has considerably strengthened the independence of the Judiciary which is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. It is a fundamental constitutional requirement in the UN basic principles

Read More

More about The Impartiality And Independence Of Judge Jimbo Kern

Related Topics

Open Document