Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 279 Ark. 328 - Matthews v. Rodgers

Matthews v. Rodgers’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
1
states following
March 2021
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 60 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Arthur v. Zearley (1999), Anderson v. State (2004)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 60 state decisions

36019831990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 455

Relies on Ray Dodge, Inc. v. Moore · Holmes v. Hollingsworth · Bolden v. State · Walker v. State · St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Pennington

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

  1. “The fact that a judge may have, or develop during the trial, an opinion, or a bias or prejudice does not make the trial judge so biased and prejudiced as to require his disqualification in further proceedings. Walker v. State, 241 Ark. 300 , 408 S.W.2d 905 (1966). Whether a judge has become biased to the point that he should disqualify himself is a matter to be confined to the conscience of the judge. Narisi v. Narisi, 229 Ark. 1059 , 320 S.W.2d 757 (1959). The reason is that bias is a subjective matter peculiarly within the knowledge of the trial judge. We find no Arkansas case where a trial judge has stated that he was without prejudice and could hear a case and, without more, we reversed that decision. Thus, absent some objective demonstration of prejudice, it is a communication of bias which will cause us to reverse a judge’s decision on disqualification.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.