Feb. 9, 2009 — Jeffrey Prosser, former CEO and owner of Innovative Telephone, has demanded that the bankruptcy judge presiding over his trial recuse herself.
Prosser's lawyers have filed papers calling for the recusal of Judge Judith K. Fitzgerald from the proceedings that started nearly three years ago: It was on Feb. 10, 2006, that Prosser's creditors first sought to push him into involuntary bankruptcy.
Prosser's statement said the judge had shown time and again that she was biased against him. One of the indications of this, cited in the motion, was this statement recorded on a courtroom transcript: "… frankly, based on some of the evidence that I've heard today, if the United States attorney doesn't think that they're criminally involved in something, there's probably something wrong with the United States attorney."
"They" was a reference to Prosser.
Prosser's lawyers cited several other instances in which they stated that the judge was prejudiced against him. They noted that James P. Carroll, a Massachusetts business executive and financial consultant, had been used as an expert witness against Prosser, and then was appointed — over Prosser's objections — to be the court's trustee on Prosser's personal finances.
They also charged that Fitzgerald had unfairly limited the courtroom activities of Lawrence H. Schoenbach, a criminal defense lawyer retained by Prosser. They said that he had been barred from talking with attorneys for Prosser's wife, Dawn.
Earlier in the case, in an unrelated action, Prosser's creditors sought to recuse the U.S. District Court judge, Curtis Gómez, from the case. He is the person who, among other things, hears appeals from Fitzgerald's rulings.
The creditors' lawyers wanted Gómez out of the case because, they said, he had publicly thanked Holland L. Redfield III, among others, for his appointment to the bench. Redfield was then an employee of one of Prosser's corporations and was the Republican National Committeeman for the Virgin Islands when then-President George W. Bush appointed Gómez.
The judge refused to recuse himself, and his position was subsequently supported by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Observers wondered whether the recusal motion would irritate the judge and encourage him to side with Prosser in the case. The public will never know the judge's reaction to the recusal motion but, in a series of recent cases, he has ruled against Prosser more than he has ruled in his favor. (See "Judge Says No, No and No to Prosser Appeals.")
Back Talk Share your reaction to this news with other Source readers. Please include headline, your name and city and state/country or island where you reside.
