Schweitzer v. Mattingley’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
November 2019
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Berge v. Berge · Datz v. Dosch · Rath v. Rath · Rath v. Rath · Smith v. Martinez
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While a judge has a duty to recuse when required by the Code of Judicial Conduct, a judge also has an equally strong duty not to recuse when the facts do not require recusal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Grasser v. Grasser“Unlike a demand under N.D.C.C. § 29-15-21, a district court judge is not immediately divested of authority upon the filing of a motion to recuse.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Grasser v. Grasser“The law presumes judges are unbiased, and adverse or erroneous rulings do not, by themselves, demonstrate bias.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rath v. Rath
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.