Alabama district judge suspended and accused of letting child abuse cases ‘languish,’ complaint says

OZARK, Ala. (AP) — An Alabama district judge who presides over cases in juvenile court, often involving child abuse or neglect, has been suspended after a state-led investigation that looked at hundreds of cases and took over a year to complete.

The Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission, a panel that investigates ethics accusations against judges, filed a complaint with the Court of the Judiciary against Dale County District Judge Stuart Smith on Monday, alleging that Smith was “not effectively maintaining his docket and allowing cases that are assigned to him to languish without action, in some instances for years.”

In addition to small claims, child support and civil court cases, Smith was also assigned juvenile court cases that involved abuse, neglect or parents attempting to reunite with their children. When the investigation began in May 2023, Smith had over 300 cases on his docket. The investigation considered cases going back to Smith’s first term which began in 2017.

Smith did not respond to emails or phone calls requesting comment.

The complaint describes one case where the Dale County Department of Human Resources, responsible for handling child welfare, filed for custody of a 6-year-old due to allegations of sexual abuse and drug use. Smith waited 18 months to take action and never appointed a legally mandated court guardian to advocate for the child in proceedings, the complaint alleges.

In another instance, the complaint describes a case where the grandparent of an 8-month-old child filed a petition that described the parent as being “unstable.” The parent wrote a letter of support for the petition.

Smith took over 18 months to enter the order that would allow the grandparent to pursue a dependency petition, the complaint alleges.

Under Alabama law, judges are required to review dependency hearings within six months of the petition, and all transfer hearings within nine months. Some circumstances require judges to expedite that timeline.

In both cases, Smith only took action in the case on the same day he was notified that the Judiciary Investigations Committee had launched an investigation, according to the complaint.

The complaint says both of these cases were emblematic of a larger pattern in Smith’s work.

These delays have “burdened the litigants, attorneys, families, children, foster parents and relative caregivers in these cases,” and undermined public confidence in the judicial system, according to the complaint.

Lawyers representing the Judicial Inquiry Commission said that they are unable to comment because the proceedings of the commission are confidential. The trial and all filings will be public.

In 2022, the last year with available data, the Judicial Inquiry Commission filed charges against only two judges, one resulting in a judge’s 120-day suspension without pay and another with an agreement and a judge’s 45-day suspension without pay and other terms.

Barring an agreement, a trial date will be set to determine whether to charge Smith.