The Ridicule of Litigants in Family Court

This story appeared recently in the Globe and Mail, and Alice Woolley commented on it at Legal Ethics Forum a few days ago.

Her post summarizes the situation:

A family court judge in Ontario recently “turned to ridicule” to deal with feuding spouses.  Noting that reason had failed to impress the litigants, he tried mockery instead.  Noting that the ex-wife’s attempt to run down her ex with a van was a “telltale sign that a husband and wife are drifting apart” and starting his judgment “Paging Dr. Freud, paging Dr. Freud” the judge derided the conduct of the parties.  He ultimately awarded the wife custody of their daughter, but only $1/month in spousal support.  The story is here.  The judgment is here.  While I admire the style and rhetorical flourish, I can’t myself endorse this as a strategy, even if effective.  It seems to me inconsistent with judicial office.  I’m not condemning him – I can imagine the frustration.  But it doesn’t seem appropriate nonetheless.

There is no question in my mind that as amusing as the decision is to read, the manner in which it is written is entirely improper.

More