Couples who turn to the family court system for help with divorce proceedings expect to experience fair process, with proceedings overseen by an impartial judge and grounded in transparency, neutrality, and the protection of vulnerable parties. They also expect their attorneys to leverage the law on their behalf, representing their interests to the fullest extent that the law allows.
It is understandable that the expectation of fair process won’t be met in some cases. A variety of factors, some inevitable, can crop up to complicate divorce proceedings. Even judges and attorneys committed to fair process can fall short in cases that involve extreme complications or contestations.
But in some cases, the failures that strip a party in a divorce case of their right to fair process can appear to involve more than just oversight failures or incompetence. In Chris Hanson’s divorce case, for instance, the circumstances seemed to indicate that other forces were bent on undermining fairness in Florida’s family court system. The behavior of both the judge and attorneys in Hanson’s case showed him that power was seeking to rob him of fair process by permitting unethical tactics and strategies.
Are families experiencing judicial misconduct in the Florida court system?
“The clearly documented patterns of misconduct and cover-ups documented in more than a year’s worth of evidence critical to the relevant litigation make a clear case for both extreme incompetence and corruption in the Florida family court system,” Hanson says. “It is a case that reveals institutional failures fostering corruption within Florida’s judicial system that has clearly reached a perilous and unprecedented degree.”
As a lawyer himself, Hanson brought years of first-hand experience to his divorce case, where he appeared only as a litigant seeking a fair and equitable dissolution of marriage. Based on that experience, he was able to identify what he is confident constitutes severe attorney and judicial misconduct that denied him fairness and led to proceedings that continue to be incredibly harmful to himself and his family.
Knowing that the treatment he experienced had the potential to impact other families seeking justice in family court, Hanson spoke out. Despite the risks his action poses to his career, he believes it’s critical that someone take a stand against the abuse of power he claims to have seen in his case.
“I’ve enjoyed a legal career that has been completely free of any disciplinary issues or even alleged misconduct,” Hanson shares. “Unfortunately, I fear that speaking out against the issues I’ve encountered in my own case, which point to deeply entrenched, corrupt, and powerful actors, will change that,” Hanson says. “My career prospects will most certainly be negatively affected by my decision to speak out against the most powerful lawyers and judges in the state of Florida. It’s a dangerous step, but I believe it is even more dangerous to remain silent as I see the damage this corruption is causing to my family.”
Are Florida’s oversight commissions shielding judges from accountability?
To report the signs of injustice and corruption he witnessed, Hanson filed a complaint with the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) naming Judge Kelly Ayers, the judge charged with overseeing his case. The JQC is an independent state agency that investigates allegations of judicial misconduct across district courts, county courts, circuit courts, and trial courts. When the JQC determines that allegations brought before it constitute a breach of the Judicial Canons, it can subject the judge involved to sanctions imposed by the Florida Supreme Court, the state’s highest court.
In any case brought before the family court, it is the role of the judge to protect the parties involved from misconduct on the part of the attorneys. When attorneys engage in conduct that could be classified as dishonest or unethical, a petitioner or respondent should expect the judge to challenge the behavior. Judge Ayers, Hanson told the JQC in his complaint, failed to fulfill that duty as she “consistently shielded the attorneys from accountability for grossly unethical actions.”
“The refusal by the JQC to act on my complaint, despite overwhelming evidence and the absence of any rebuttal, reflects either institutional incompetence or intentional protection of insiders,” Hanson says. “In either case, their conduct has the potential to erode public trust and violate the Commission’s constitutional mandate under the Florida Constitution.”
Is gross attorney misconduct occurring in the Florida state court system?
In addition to the complaint filed with the JQC, Hanson also reported the action of his attorney, Scott Paul Davis, to the Florida Bar. The complaint alleges Davis is guilty of “severe and multifaceted” violations of the rules attorneys are required to comply with under Florida law. Delaying document production, filing motions with no basis, and increasing the financial toll on Hanson were among the many questionable tactics Hanson detailed in his complaint.
“The most concerning and damaging aspect of my case is attorney Scott Davis’s misconduct,” Hanson says. “It’s a sign that the system lacks the oversight necessary to protect citizens from gross attorney misconduct and that it is willing to expose Florida citizens and children to the damage that misconduct causes. Overall, the activity that I witnessed reveals that the institutions tasked with attorney and judicial discipline are willing to excuse and advance massive corruption at the expense of common Floridians who are seeking only fair process.”