November Family Law Breakfast Features the Hon. Linda W. Hunter
By M. Debra Gold
Judge Hunter first discussed the county’s caseload and attempts to keep cases moving. She projected that 3,000 divorces will have been filed in DeKalb County in 2009, which does not include modification or contempt actions, or the projected 2,500 Department of Human Resources child support cases. She lamented that efficiently managing these and the other civil and criminal cases assigned to each of the 10 DeKalb County divisions is difficult, in part because the county budget no longer supports the use of senior judges to assist in the workload. Despite the caseload, however, the judge reiterated that she strives to quickly move and close cases in her division.
To that end, Judge Hunter encouraged lawyers and pro se parties to visit the DeKalb County Family Law Information Center website, www.co.dekalb.ga.us/dekalbflic, which provides information and downloadable forms. The use of the forms, she noted, helps to facilitate the efficient flow of cases, because the judges are accustomed to the forms. She also assured that she and her staff attorney, Jason Broth, are always accessible by email.
The judge then stated her belief in the pre-trial conference as an aid to narrowing the issues and thus in moving cases along. She noted that she generally conducts them in open court with the clients present rather than in chambers with attorneys only, explaining that she prefers to hear the parties answer her questions rather than their attorneys.
Judge Hunter also expressed her encouragement of mediation, especially in family law cases. She has mediators available at calendar calls and noted that the mediators settle the majority of the cases where parties use their services. She also expressed her support of Nia’s Place, a supervised visitation and exchange center and a valuable resource in domestic violence or high conflict cases. The services are offered on a sliding pay scale and are very affordable.
Children do not belong in the courtroom, in Judge Hunter’s opinion, nor does she like for a child to spend the day sitting outside of a courtroom waiting to talk to her. The judge questioned what she can glean from talking to a child for 10 minutes in the “artificial setting” of her chambers. No matter how a judge frames a ruling, she said, people find ways to determine what a child has told a judge. Judge Hunter expressed concern for possible negative consequences to the child. Her preference, she said, is to delegate the responsibility of talking to children to a Guardian ad Litem, who can do so in a non-adversarial setting. She said that in limited cases, however, if the children are older, she will meet with them in her chambers by appointment only.
For some litigants, the judge observed, having their day in court is more of a “catharsis” and a venting of emotions than an attempt to deal with actual issues. “I encourage attorneys to talk to their clients to make sure that they are trying their cases for the right reasons,” she said. Bad behavior during the marriage does not have much of an effect on an equitable division of property, she noted, unless the bad behavior involves dissipation of assets. But rather than focusing on bad behavior, as many clients want to do, she said that she tells the parties to “show me the money.” In this and other ways, she considers herself to be a practical judge who looks at the real-life consequences of the decisions she makes. Her goal, she stated, is for litigants to leave her courtroom as whole as possible so that they can continue to have a life after the divorce.
Along that line, she noted that in her courtroom, the only “rules” are the Rules of Evidence and the law. She stated her belief in flexibility and following “general guidelines” rather than sticking to rigid, hard-and-fast rules. While recognizing that this causes concern for attorneys who like predictability, she reminded the section attendees that every case is different and every attorney comes to court with different experiences and levels of expertise. She also noted that while a judge may show consistency in viewing and applying the law, absolute consistency in decision making is impossible because of the nature of family law. She summed up her feelings by stating, “If a judge is so consistent as to be predictable, then there is very little discretion being used in that court.”
If and when a case goes to trial, she said, badgering cross-examination impresses neither a judge nor a jury. Being respectful of witnesses is far more effective, in her opinion. She also suggested that if the case is tried, attorneys need to be specific about what they are asking for their client. For example, a request for “joint custody” can have many interpretations. The judge suggested that it is then up to the attorneys to show the trier of fact the factual and legal bases for granting their requests. Finally, the judge noted that at trial, financial and other issues can be baffling and difficult for the average juror to understand and process. The judge stated that she found it difficult to understand that a family would put its fate in the hands of 12 strangers. Judge Hunter accordingly ended her talk by recommending that attorneys approach the decision to go to trial with great caution.
The Family Law Section breakfast meetings are held monthly in the Harrison room at the historic old courthouse in downtown Decatur.
Edited by Katherine Durant