In re Nadeau’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[R]ulings against a litigant or knowledge gained by a judge in a prior or related court proceeding, including impressions of a litigant's personal history or credibility, are not sufficient grounds to recuse a judge in a subsequent matter.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Paul Schafer v. Meleah Schafer · In re Crystal G.

2. “[a] judge shall ... recuse ... in any proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Crystal G.