Excuse me?
Polly Ann Tausch and Thomas G. Fitch apparently are fed up.
Among the first to file a response to the Socorro Electric Cooperative’s lawsuit against its member-owners — asking for a change of venue from the 13th Judicial District Court in Los Lunas to the 7th Judicial District in Socorro on July 23 — the Socorro attorneys, acting pro se, or on their own behalf, are still waiting for their motion to be heard.
That’s because attorney Lee Deschamps of Socorro has had three judges excused from the case on behalf of different clients.
On Monday, Aug. 16, Tausch and Fitch filed a motion to strike further disqualifications of judges. The motion claims excusals by a single attorney in the same case constitutes “judge shopping” and that all the shuffling has prolonged the lawsuit and increased costs.
A hearing on Tausch and Fitch’s motion had been scheduled for Tuesday, Aug. 10, with the original judge assigned to the case, John W. Pope. That hearing was canceled when Deschamps had Pope excused on behalf of client Charlene West of Lemitar.
Tausch and Fitch filed a second motion with the new judge assigned to the case, William A. Sanchez, but he was excused by Deschamps on behalf of Charlie Wagner of Magdalena, whom he also represents, before a hearing date could be set.
A third motion was filed with yet another judge, George P. Eichwald, but again Deschamps had the judge dismissed, this time on behalf of client Clark Hust of Magdalena.
Now, Judge John F. Davis is assigned to the case.
Tauch and Fitch state in their motion to Judge Davis that state law allows a party to peremptorily excuse one district judge based upon an assumed prejudice or bias.
“In this case, the disqualifications do not appear to be aimed at prejudice or bias but seem to be an attempt at judge-shopping by disqualifying every judge in the Thirteenth Judicial District,” the complaint reads. “The result is that the court proceedings are being delayed, causing needless expense.”
Deschamps said on Monday that he has no plans to excuse Davis.
Deschamps and law partner Steve Kortemeier are representing several of the approximately 13,000 defendants in the case.
The co-op filed the suit against “all unnamed member-owners of the Socorro Electric Cooperative Inc.,” in an effort to block three new bylaws passed by members at the annual meeting in April. All three bylaws address transparency of governance, and call for board of trustees meetings to be open to the public and the press, and permitting members to view co-op records, books and audits.
The co-op argues that the bylaws are unworkable, unreasonable and illegal.