No Basis To Disqualify

The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed a trial court determination not to disqualify the judge in a wrongful death due to medical malpractice case

This case concerns whether a district court can review an advisory decision of an Idaho Board of Medicine prelitigation screening panel. Dr. Nathan Rencher filed a motion for summary judgment under seal, seeking to dismiss the claims of Jessica Wiseman and her children on the basis that they failed to comply with the mandatory prelitigation screening requirements of Idaho law. In support of his motion, Rencher filed, under seal, a copy of the prelitigation screening panel’s advisory decision. The district court later granted Rencher’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the Wisemans had failed to comply with the prelitigation screening requirement based on information contained in the advisory decision. The Wisemans also filed a motion to disqualify the district judge because he had reviewed the advisory decision, which the judge denied.

The Wisemans appeal the district court’s decision dismissing their claims against Rencher, arguing that the district court erred by considering the advisory decision. The Wisemans also argue that the prelitigation screening statutes are unconstitutional and that the district judge should be disqualified for cause on remand. We reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Rencher because the prelitigation screening statutes precluded the district court from considering the advisory decision. We decline the Wisemans’ request to disqualify the district judge on remand.

Held

Trial judges routinely consider contested evidence and make rulings on its admissibility. Sometimes this Court reverses the ruling on appeal. Erroneously considering inadmissible evidence typically does not, standing by itself, give rise to actual bias or prejudice. See Plasse v. Reid, 172 Idaho 53, 65, 529 P.3d 718, 730 (2023) (“An adverse ruling, on its own, is insufficient evidence of bias.”); cf. State v. Shackelford, 155 Idaho 454, 459, 314 P.3d 136, 141 (2013) (“[A] trial judge’s exposure to evidence, admissible or not, standing alone, does not demonstrate bias at sentencing.”). The Wisemans have failed to demonstrate that any appearance of bias falls within our narrow holding in Hepworth Holzer or that the district judge exhibited actual bias. Therefore, we decline to disqualify the district judge on remand.

(Mike Frisch)