Aronson v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
14 F.3d 1578 · 1994
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 372 · 28 U.S.C. § 455 · 38 U.S.C. § 7254 · 38 U.S.C. § 7264 · 38 U.S.C. § 7292
Relies on In the Matters of Lee Roy Murchison and John Whites · Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp. · Aetna Life Insurance v. Lavoie · McDonald v. United States · Environmental Protection Agency v. Brown
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. (b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances: (1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Before 1974, § 455 required “any justice or judge ... to disqualify himself in any case in which he has a substantial interest, has been of counsel, is or has been a material witness, or is so related to any party or his attorney as to render it improper, in his opinion, for him to sit on the trial, appeal, or proceeding therein.” Section 455 was amended in 1974 to clarify and broaden the grounds for judicial disqualification and to conform with the recently adopted ABA Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3 C. The revised provision also omitted the phrase “in his opinion”, in order to eliminate the subjective standard. See H.R.Rep. No. 93-1453 (S.Rep. No. 93-419), 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 5 (1974), reprinted in 1974 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6351, 6354-55. The purpose was explained in Roberts v. Bailar, 625 F.2d 125, 129 (6th Cir.1980): To promote public confidence in the impartiality of the federal judicial system, the Congress in 1974 shifted the focus of § 455____ No longer is a judge’s intro spective estimate of Ms own ability impartially to hear a case the determinate of disqualification under § 455. The standard is now objective.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.