Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_ivgz4g2 wrote

That judge also denied Cox Health's motion to dismiss the case. On top of that she was suing Cox Health and the CEO of Cox Health, not a clinic. I see no corruption on the judges part and the case was handled well. Cox Health did not release information about her son, they shared a screenshot of the post she made. She released the information about her son.

14

ShadowsNMirrors OP t1_ivrl612 wrote

Samantha Cherry does NOT have the obligation or burden of protecting her son's information under H.I.P.P.A., Cox Health does.....

Sure the Judge did rule against Cox Health once, and against Samantha Cherry FAR more. The FACT that the Missouri Supreme Court Rule on this is that the Judge can not even have the appearance of an impropriety against them, is enough for Judge Michael Cordonnier to have recused him from the case. Aht, Aht.. Let me get that for you smart guy:

>RULE 2-1.2 Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary
>
>A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.

I surmise that this is either an attorney that does not know the law, or does not give a damn about the law..... Either way, he or she is not very smart...

0

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_ivrn1fv wrote

Jesus, you're still going on about this? Find a new hobby.

1

ShadowsNMirrors OP t1_ivrn6f2 wrote

You are right. You are probably tired of looking stupid....

0

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_ivrng42 wrote

By the way, chill on the ellipsis. One period is fine.

1

ShadowsNMirrors OP t1_ivrnonn wrote

I like to let my point hang in the air a little bit, ruminate if you will.

But, okay.

0

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_ivrnthx wrote

The only thing I smell in the air is your bullshit.

1

ShadowsNMirrors OP t1_ivrobp3 wrote

LOL.

I have to get back to work. I only have a set amount of time in my day to talk to children.

I know I am a little harsh and abrasive, and I know you are a moron. But, I still wish you all the best.

And Happy Holidays.

0

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_ivropau wrote

What is the third shift at Fast & Friendly like for a cashier?

1

ShadowsNMirrors OP t1_ivrow0x wrote

Not bad.. All the ice cream we can eat. How is road construction?

0

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_ivrpds6 wrote

Keeps me jacked and tan. Which your father really enjoys.

1

ShadowsNMirrors OP t1_ivh45br wrote

It's right in front of you face....

Here are the Missouri Supreme Court's Rules on when Judge's should recuse themselves:

https://www.courts.mo.gov/courts/ClerkHandbooksP2RulesOnly.nsf/c0c6ffa99df4993f8625

6ba50057dcb8/e14db401df7f552e86256ca6005211b7#RULE%202-2.11%20Recusal

RULE 2-2.11 Recusal

(A) A judge shall recuse himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality

might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances:

(1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s

lawyer or knowledge of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding that would

preclude the judge from being fair and impartial.

(2) The judge knows that he or she, individually or as a fiduciary, or the judge’s

spouse, parent, or child wherever residing, or any other member of the judge’s

family residing in the judge’s household is:

(a) a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, general partner, managing member, or trustee

of a party;

(b) acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;

(c) a person who has more than a de minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the

proceeding; or

−7

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_ivh4ojb wrote

Yeah, I read your whole thing. Still doesn't change my mind. I do not see how his father being one of many employees that are in no way involved in the case means he will be biased or impartial.

9

Low_Tourist t1_ivhedu6 wrote

His father died in 2018, too. So that makes it even less relevant.

10