Georgia Judge Gail S. Tusan charged with Unfair, Improper, and Prejudicial Treatment of Pro Se Litigants — Sign this Petition


Georgia Judge Gail S. Tusan charged with Unfair, Improper, and Prejudicial treatment of Pro Se Litigants — Sign this Petition

GEORGIA — the birthplace of the civil rights movement and home of justice advocates as historically important as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and as politically significant as Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter — was budgeted to spend nearly $154 MILLION DOLLARS on its legal system in 2011.

Where does that money come from? Georgia’s TAXPAYERS, OF COURSE, and what they want for their money is a system of courts that treat each and every litigant with fairness, justice, equality, and respect — whether he or she has a lawyer or not!

One of those taxpayers is EDWARD J. DORT — an upstanding, hard-working, community-minded, law-abiding resident of Fulton County, Georgia, and father of three.  In 2008, Mr. Dort’s former wife, Karen J. Davare, instituted divorce proceedings against him in the Superior Court of Fulton County.  Ms. Davare launched the case by using knowingly false allegations of “threats of domestic violence” to have the Family Court remove Mr. Dort from the marital home — a painful spectacle she perpetrated in the presence of their children.  As devastating and demoralizing as that experience was, Mr. Dort would later come to learn that the greatest miscarriage of justice was to come later not from Ms. Davare herself, but from the Fulton County Superior Court itself.

In August 2009, Mr. Dort’s divorce went to trial before Judge Gail S. Tusan.  Financially distressed from having previously spent tens of thousands of dollars on attorneys, Mr. Dort was forced to go it alone as a Self-Represented Litigant (also known as a “Pro Se Litigant”).  Taking to heart Judge Tusan’s public statement that “all persons and entities coming before me are treated fairly, equally with courtesy and respect,” which is prominently stated in her re-election campaign website, Mr. Dort decided to put all of his trust in the Georgia court system and all his faith in domestic democracy.

Unfortunately for Mr. Dort, as well as the cause for justice, the trial turned out to be a travesty of justice, resulting in various inequities which continue to plague Mr. Dort to this day, including, but not limited to, the following:

* Judge Tusan failed to voluntarily recuse herself from the case even though Mr. Robert D. Boyd, a member of Ms. Davare’s litigation team, was and still is a member of Tusan’s judicial re-election committee.

* Judge Tusan never addressed Mr. Dort’s repeated allegations of parental alienation by Ms. Davare regarding the parties’ teenage daughter, resulting in Mr. Dort not seeing his daughter in nearly two years.

* Relinquishing her responsibility as a judge in preparing final judgments, Judge Tusan adopted and entered, almost verbatim, opposing counsel’s draft of the final judgment, which was replete with pronouncements and monetary damages that unjustly favored Ms. Davare.

* With regard to child support and alimony, Judge Tusan permitted unlawful calculation favoring Ms. Davare by accepting opposing counsel’s misrepresentation of additional income that did not exist.

* To assist her in the administration of post-trial petitions that have ensued, Judge Tusan appointed Gary M. Alembik as her “Judicial Officer,” despite the fact that Mr. Alembik is associated with a law firm that practices family law in Georgia. Family Law attorneys functioning as judicial officers in FAMILY COURT?

* Both Judge Tusan and Mr. Alembik have permitted opposing counsel to submit “evidentiary” documents at hearings at the last minute, preventing Mr. Dort from having adequate time to review them, let alone to rebut them with evidence or witnesses of his own.

* With regard to the requirement that financial information submitted by both parties must be affirmed under oath as true and accurate, Mr. Dort complied as directed, but Judge Tusan and Mr. Alembik have unlawfully and prejudicially waived Ms. Davare’s compliance with the same.

To aid Mr. Dort and HUNDREDS of other Self-Represented Litigants in Fulton County Superior Court who suffer untold judicial bias, litigation abuse, and misconduct from opposing attorneys and judges, PULSE sent a letter to the Honorable Chief Judge CYNTHIA D. WRIGHT, dated March 23, 2011, seeking her intervention and investigation. Sadly, there has been NO RESPONSE to said letter — not even the courtesy of an acknowledgement of its receipt.


The basic intention of this Petition is to hold Chief Judge Cynthia Wright accountable for the conduct of the judges under her direction, namely Judge Tusan and Mr. Alembik, with regard to the unfair, improper, and prejudicial treatment they are inflicting on numerous Self-Represented Litigants. Fulton County residents, like Mr. Dort, who approach the Court unrepresented (many of whom are taxpaying, contributing members of society) should be respectfully and justly treated as “PEOPLE without lawyers” by the PUBLIC SERVANTS of the Court, and not as some sort of pestilence deserving mistreatment.


Let us send a message to Chief Judge Wright and to all of the other judges of the Fulton County Superior Court that ALL LITIGANTS, those with and without lawyers, are entitled to a legal system that is unbiased, equitable, and just. Tell them, with your signature to this Petition, that we want our PUBLICLY FUNDED legal institutions to be MORE RESPONSIVE and ACCOUNTABLE to the adjudication needs of THE PEOPLE rather than to the career and economic interests of judges and lawyers.




We need to send a message to the judges in America.  Please sign the Petition.  Let’s show what a group of us can work together to do.  Let’s try to get Judge Tusan to at least recuse herself, if not resign.

William M. Windsor

I, William M. Windsor, am not an attorney.  This website expresses my OPINIONS.   The comments of visitors or guest authors to the website are their opinions and do not therefore reflect my opinions.  Anyone mentioned in any article is welcome to file a response.  This website does not provide legal advice.  I do not give legal advice.  I do not practice law.  This website is to expose government corruption, law enforcement corruption, political corruption, and judicial corruption. Whatever this website says about the law is presented in the context of how I or others perceive the applicability of the law to a set of circumstances if I (or some other author) was in the circumstances under the conditions discussed.  Despite of my concerns about lawyers in general, I suggest that anyone with legal questions consult an attorney for an answer, particularly after reading anything on this website.  The law is a gray area at best.  Please read our Legal Notice and Terms.



{jcomments on}

Leave a Reply