In re Philip G. McCarthey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 1 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Embroiling the presiding judge in the adversarial processes of any case is not only unseemly, it is calculated to give rise at the least to a resulting appearance of bias against the aggressor litigant although, as previously noted, that species of boot strap bias cannot be recognized, as a matter of law, as a disqualifying circumstance. To do so would simply invite manipulated harassment by any lawyer unscrupulous enough to willingly embark on a course of conduct designed to disqualify an otherwise impartial judge whose views are thought to be adverse to the interests of the client. Such a tactic would, at worst, cause an unjustified voluntary disqualification of the presiding judge or, at least, cause endless delay in the litigation while those maneuvers are in process.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 162 So. 3d 88 - Frederick J. Keitel, III, FJK Properties, Inc., and FJK IV Properties, Inc. v. Thomas D. Agostino, Sr.

2. “craft a procedure that essentially will require district judges to submit to discovery ... when a party lacks an adequate factual basis for disqualification on non-financial matters”). 25 . Defendant-Intervenors also point to a number of Judge Walker's rulings in the case,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 790 F. Supp. 2d 1119 - Perry v. Schwarzenegger