Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jamese777

“Appellants have provided no reasonable basis for questioning the impartiality of the district court judge. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994).”

I would say that the brief filed and posted in this thread takes care of THAT. Not that you would notice.


21 posted on 06/01/2010 8:45:28 PM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: EDINVA

I would say that the brief filed and posted in this thread takes care of THAT. Not that you would notice.


Psst...the District Court’s decision was already upheld on appeal. Its a wee bit late to be asking the ORIGINAL TRIAL JUDGE to recuse himself!

That’s what I noticed aside from the fact that the word “vacation” of opinion is used incorrectly in the motion for recussal.

“The plaintiffs/appellants jointly move for recusal of the judge below pursuant to and the vacation of his opinions as a consequence of the recognition of his bias and appearance of bias under that statute.”

I think they want Judge Robertson to go on vacation. The correct term would be “vacating.”


24 posted on 06/01/2010 9:14:28 PM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson