This type of communication is generally prohibited in legal proceedings to ensure fairness and that all parties have the same information as the judge deciding the case.
Exceptions are made for administrative purposes, such as scheduling or emergencies, provided no party gains an advantage.
If an ex parte communication occurs, the judge must disclose it to all parties and give them an opportunity to respond.
Examples of prohibited ex parte communications include:
A party sending a letter directly to the judge without providing a copy to the other parties.
A judge receiving a communication that discusses the merits of a case from a party or their representative without notifying the other parties.
Exceptions to the prohibition on ex parte communications include:
Written advice from a disinterested expert on the law, provided the judge gives advance notice to the parties. Communications expressly authorized by law, such as those related to traffic citations.
If a judge receives an unauthorized ex parte communication, they must promptly notify all parties of its substance and allow them to respond.
Sorry, the source for Post #9 is from AI.
Exceptions are made for administrative purposes, such as scheduling or emergencies, provided no party gains an advantage.
If an ex parte communication occurs, the judge must disclose it to all parties and give them an opportunity to respond.
Fine. So why were 75 democrat Congressmen meeting WEEKLY in private with NUMEROUS federal district and regional appellant judges the past 3 months?