Chesterfield Circuit Court clerk sues judge

Chesterfield Circuit Court clerk sues judge

(File photo)

Chesterfield County Circuit Court Clerk Judy L. Worthington is suing the chief circuit court judge.

» 8 Comments | Post a Comment

Chesterfield County Circuit Court Clerk Judy L. Worthington is suing the chief circuit court judge in a turf spat, among other things, over the county's Web site.

Worthington complains that last November Judge Michael C. Allen issued an order authorizing lawyer Aubrey M. Davis Jr. to perform marriages. The order directed that Davis' name be added to a list of people authorized to do so on the clerk's Web page of the county Web site.

Last month she asked the Supreme Court of Virginia to direct Allen to drop his order.

Worthington agrees judges can appoint celebrants, but says the celebrant must first file a petition and the clerk collect a fee. She said that Davis, "had not filed the usual petition to be qualified, paid the normal statutorily-required fee, nor posted the bond required by the Court."

It isn't the clerk's first legal scrape that Worthington, clerk since 1992, has had with Chesterfield judges.

In 2002, Worthington cost the county $389,000 in the settlement of a $5.35 million libel suit that Chesterfield Circuit Judge T.J. Hauler filed against her over a letter she wrote to the General Assembly's courts committees when Hauler came up for reappointment.

Davis, a former Richmond Commonwealth's Attorney, said today that he has been authorized to perform civil marriages anywhere in the state for almost 30 years, but could not comment further because of the pending suit.

In a written response to Worthington's suit, Allen's lawyers wrote, "this case involves a simple order, which [Worthington] stubbornly refuses to accept."

Allen's position is that Davis was properly authorized to conduct marriages by the Richmond Circuit Court and posted the requisite bond there in 1980. His appointment remains in effect. Until last year the Web page in question included Davis' name, Allen said.

Worthington contends she removed Davis's name from the Web page -- not affiliated with the courts -- so it would include only those marriage celebrants "who had been authorized by the Circuit Court for the County of Chesterfield."

At the same time Davis' name was removed from the list, which had been in alphabetical order -- Worthington's was added to the top.

Allen's lawyers suggested Worthington removed Davis' from the list because the law firm he works for supported a candidate, L. Dennis Collins, who ran against Worthington in the 2007 Republican primary. Davis' name was on the Web site as recently as last year.

When his name was dropped, Davis asked Allen to authorize him to perform marriage ceremonies in Chesterfield County and, presumably, get his name back on the list. On Nov. 12, Allen entered an order authorizing Davis to perform marriages in the county.

"The clerk refused to obey the order," Allen said. Allen said he explained his rationale for entering the order and offered to meet with her or her staff, but she declined. Allen contends he only directed that the Web site accurately list the people authorized to conduct weddings by the Chesterfield Circuit Court.

Allen explained that his "order reflects an important principle: that public statements of officers of the court should reflect accurately what the court has done and should not be used for personal or political reasons."

Worthington says that unlike Davis, "each and every marriage celebrant listed on the Web site has filed a petition, paid the filing fee, and posted a bond; [and that she] is bound by statute to treat each applicant equally."

"Politics played no part in the listing of marriage celebrants, as evidenced by the fact that Worthington's last political opponent for the Clerk's job, L. Dennis Collins, is on the list today," she wrote.


Contact Frank Green at (804) 649-6340 or .

Advertisement

 
View More: latest news,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by chs on January 14, 2009 at 9:39 am

It appears to me that the Honorable Ms. Worthington is doing the job that she was elected to do, enforce the statues of the law.  If Mr. Lindsey wants to perform marriages in Chesterfield County, why should he not have to abide by the statue?  Isn’t this just another example of the “Good Old Boys” trying to manipulate and side step the statutes to suit their agenda?  Hold fast Ms. Worthington; you are performing the duties that the folks elected you to do.  As voters, isn’t that what we expect from all our elected officials?

Flag Comment Posted by tm on January 13, 2009 at 11:18 pm

The Honorable Judy Worthington is just that HONORABLE!  She is an elected official looking out for her constituents.  The facts aren’t clear in this article—looks like the Judge doesn’t like being challenged…he’s already made a mistake by talking about a “pending” case. The Judge should be following the law and not make exceptions for a friend.

Flag Comment Posted by MR M on January 13, 2009 at 4:45 pm

Okay hot headed clerk cost county $400 grand ,no problem ,tax papers foot the bill. Here we go again ,i say time for a new clerk.

Flag Comment Posted by blueeyes on January 13, 2009 at 2:37 am

Once again this is typical Chesterfield. If the clerks of court would actually do their job instead of minding the judges business things might accidentialy get done the correct way and why is she still there? If I cost my boss almost400,00.00$ I would have lost my job? Who is she sleeping with anyway? Hello taxpayers say something this is one reason I left you over rated county.

Flag Comment Posted by jh28 on January 13, 2009 at 12:20 am

Why is she still employed if she continues to cost the county legal fees?  There has to be someone else out there that can do the job in a competent basis and not get involved in stupid lawsuits.

Flag Comment Posted by Stellaluna on January 12, 2009 at 8:44 pm

Judy Worthington is a loose cannon and needs to be removed from office.  She thinks she’s above the law and needs to be forcibly reminded that she’s not.

Flag Comment Posted by mtnyak on January 12, 2009 at 8:41 pm

What a riveting scoop…I hope the suspense lasts.

Flag Comment Posted by Larry Lanberg on January 12, 2009 at 8:39 pm

What is this—a soap opera? The county spends hundred of thousands on petty feuding? What a cesspool of corruption. :)

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

 

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
Times-Dispatch Shop
 

Advertisement