Amends TCA Title 8; Title 16; Title 17; Title 27; Title 39; Title 49 and Title 50.

This bill abolishes recusal motions in all courts and adds provisions governing the conduct of courts and the process for appeals, and, specifically, appeals when there is the appearance of undermined neutrality (this bill states that the undermined neutrality provisions are based on the United States supreme court decision of Williams v. Pennsylvania), as follows: (1) An adjudicator is not qualified to adjudicate a case, if there is an appearance of "undermined neutrality" (for example, a district attorney who prosecuted a case and sought the death penalty later being a supreme court justice when a petition for postconviction relief in the same case is pending before a court and refusing to recuse himself, which was the issue in the Williams case). This bill removes all protections afforded by the doctrine of judicial immunity from an adjudicator who knowingly adjudicates with an appearance of undermined neutrality, irrespective of the merit or lack of merit of the adjudication; (2) The appearance of undermined neutrality of an adjudicator must be determined by any credible information, with weight and reliability equal to or greater than the information relied on by the United States supreme court to disqualify the justice in the case of Williams v. Pennsylvania. This bill sets out in detail certain specific parameters for such a determination; (3) This bill states that an adjudication by an adjudicator who has adjudicated with an appearance of undermined neutrality has no force or effect as emanating from a court; (4) This bill abolishes recusal motions and provides that the possibility of an appearance of undermined neutrality is, in the first instance, a private self-assessment determination by the adjudicator assigned a case; (5) If on self-assessment an adjudicator concludes that there is cause to believe that an appearance of undermined neutrality might occur, then the self-assessing adjudicator is duty-bound to withdraw from adjudicating the assigned case; (6) If an adjudicator, after the self-assessment, decides not to withdraw, the adjudicator must state such decision, in a writing filed in the record of the assigned case, titled adjudicator's neutrality affirmance, with as much or as little explanation as the adjudicator wishes to include. Such statements will be taken as truthful and accurate, until proved to the contrary; (7) If an adjudicator who does not withdraw based on the self-assessment later discovers that withdrawal would have been appropriate, the adjudicator will be immediately disqualified as the adjudicator and must withdraw; (8) A litigator in the case may file a request to review an adjudicator's decision to not withdraw. This bill sets out in detail the procedure for such action, which includes the administrative office of the courts appointing a panel of five former members of the general assembly who are not lawyers or adjudicators to review the decision; (9) This bill establishes requirements for court opinions, prohibits the inclusion of dicta in published opinions, and requires, after July 1, 2022, that all opinions and holdings of the court of appeals and court of criminal appeals be published in the official reporter of the state and, thereby, be considered binding precedent; (10) This bill requires trial and appellate courts to identify and prepare a memorandum when a case is a case of first impression. This bill sets out in detail the requirements for such memorandum; (11) This bill requires adjudicators to prepare a proposed order or judgment for review by the litigants in a case, and creates a process for review of the proposed order or judgment if a litigant files a written critique of the proposed order or judgment; (12) This bill requires the clerks of all courts, when a case is initiated by their respective court, to file an order requiring the initiating person to engage in formal mediation, prohibits the issuance of any other order in the case until there has been mediation. This bill sets out in detail the process for such mediation; (13) Under this bill, before a trial court adjudicator is permanently assigned to adjudicate a case, each litigant in a case will have a single peremptory right to excuse one adjudicator preliminarily assigned to adjudicate the case; (14) This bill establishes requirements for the initial assignment of adjudicators by the trial court; (15) This bill establishes requirements for in rem cases, including time limits for adjudicating such cases and stating that certain Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply in such cases; (16) This bill provides for the disqualification of an adjudicator for provoked or unprovoked intemperance; and (17) This bill establishes requirements to govern voluntary dismissals by nonsuit.