I was flabbergasted when I learned that Gina Higgins had been elected as a circuit court judge! She had previously applied to the Judicial Selection Commission for the vacancy created by the death of Judge Rita Stotts; however, the Commission chose NOT to select her for the position. The Commission nominated Lorrie K. Ridder (one of three persons nominated) and Governor Bredesen selected her to fill the vacant slot. When the position came up for election in 2010, Higgins ran for the position and was elected. WHAT!!!!
Refer back to the post GALs Gone Wild - Part 2 of 2, posted on February 4, 2011. Higgins, while serving as a guardian ad litem, “blatantly refused to answer questions regarding Higgins personal relationship with” the trial judge of the case. Specifically, at her deposition, questioned by attorney Gail Mathes:
Q. I asked you a question yesterday but I guess I need to have it confirmed on the record under oath. As I understand it, there’s been no prior relationship between you and Judge Stokes; is that correct?
A. I’ll answer that question if y’all tell me who gave y’all this information.
Q. Ms. Higgins.
A. I’ll answer that question if you tell me who suggested there was a relationship between myself and Judge Stokes.
Q. My client is the one who –
A. Where did she get her information?
Q. I am the one taking this deposition today.
A. Then I’m not going to answer it.
Q. You’re refusing to answer the question?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Based on what grounds?
A. I’m just not going to answer.
Q. Well, then I’ll just have to cite you for contempt.
A. Please do.
Also, regarding her fees while serving as a guardian ad litem, Higgins responded in an email as follows:
As to a billing statement from me, why do you need one. I have not taken
the time to prepare a detailed bill in this case. I am not inclined to waste
my time. If you agree to and send me a check (for no less than $4,000), I
will take the time to submit an invoice. You should know that it will
reflect a lot more than $4,000 or $8,000 for the work done in this case.
Otherwise, I am not going to waste my time.
So in this case, Higgins basically said pay me without a billing statement or the statement I make will be a lot more!
However, this is not the first time Higgins ran into problems with her fees. In a complaint to the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility, Higgins was accused of embezzling money from an estate. The Board of Professional Responsibility filed a Petition for Discipline, which contained the following allegations:
[Higgins is the Respondent.]
39. In negotiating the costs of the nursing home, Ms. Epps’ family applied for Medicaid benefits. The family discovered that Respondent had cashed a check in the amount of $45,149.68 in Ms. Epps’ name. Ms. Brown contacted respondent’s office and asked that Respondent provide them a written statement that Ms. Epps had not received this money. Respondent did not respond.
40. As a result of Respondent’s failure to respond, it took several months for Ms. Epps’ family to make Ms. Epps eligible for Medicaid benefits. The nursing home bills accordingly fell in arrears.
[Isn’t this FORGERY and EMBEZZLEMENT among other things?]
58. Respondent has taken a fee of $18,000.00. Ms. Brown and Mr. Brown has asked Respondent to provide documentation as to the fee. Respondent has not provided this documentation and has retained all of the monies.
59. Respondent has thereby violated RPC 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.7, 1.8(f), 1.15, 1.16 and 8.4(c) and (d).
In response to a survey by The Commercial Appeal prior to the 2010 judicial election, Higgins stated, regarding the Petition for Discipline:
“In 2008, I entered a guilty plea to a Petition for Discipline in a probate matter that I have handled since 1998. I was appointed as Conservator, then Administratrix and attorney for the Estate. After the client died her heirs and asked that I sell certain real property they inherited outside the Estate. I failed to sign a contract with them and after a fiduciary for the heirs got involved, problems arose and complaints were filed. This oversight arose because generally no contract is required in appointed cases. I entered a plea for failing to return calls and moving the Estate to closure. As part of that plea, I agreed to return my fee and was given a private reprimand.”
So all of this, and nothing but a “private reprimand”. So goes the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility.
In another matter from 2002, Higgins admitted to The Commercial Appeal:
"In 2002, my office represented an individual in a personal injury case wherein we filed a General Sessions lawsuit. Service was made by the Sheriff Department but we were not given notice of the court date. The case was dismissed and a complaint was filed by the client. We were able to get the case reinstated, but there was a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. This also affected an adoption matter I was handling for the same client. Consequently, my office withdrew from representation. The client retained new counsel. I was allowed to have the case placed under diversion and had to complete certain continuing legal education courses."
PRIVATE REPRIMANDS AND DIVERSIONS.
And now she is JUDGING others?!?!?!?!?!
Woe is the person with a case in her court.
No comments:
Post a Comment