The responding party in a family law proceeding brought a motion to change seeking to eliminate child and spousal support arrears arising from a separation agreement filed with the court.
The self-represented party allegedly failed to file a response affidavit, and submissions proceeded on the assumption that no responding evidence existed.
Upon reviewing the court file, the judge determined that the responding party had in fact filed a response in the underlying motion to change and that the motion before the court was a continuation of that proceeding.
Because the judge had previously presided over a settlement conference and because the hearing had proceeded on a mistaken factual premise regarding the evidence, the judge recused himself and directed that the motion be heard by another judge.
