Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 595 A2D 381 - Los v. Los

Los v. Los’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
6
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Johnson v. Carroll (2004), Stevenson v. State (2001)

25 state decisions

170199120002010decided

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

Relies on United States v. Grinnell Corp. · Ungar v. Sarafite · 109 Wis. 2d 96 - State v. Walberg · Weber v. State · Smith v. Smith

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

  1. “appearance of bias sufficient to cause doubt as to the judge's impartiality.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “any reasonable basis to question the impartiality of the trial judge.” Weber v. State, Del.Supr., 547 A.2d 948, 952 (1988). 9 . NLRB v. Donnelly Garment Co., 330 U.S. 219, 237 , 67 S.Ct. 756 , 91 L.Ed. 854 (1947); see Los, 595 A.2d at 384 (“Where the basis for the alleged disqualification is a claim, under Canon 3 C(l), that the judge ‘has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party,’ no per se or automatic disqualification is required.”); see also Weber, 547 A.2d at 952 (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A ruling by a trial court on a motion for disqualification would generally be deemed interlocutory and not subject to review without compliance with the provisions of Supreme Court Rule 42. The ruling denying recusal, although interlocutory, became final in this case when the Family Court dismissed Father's petition because of his refusal to participate in the hearing.”
    1 later decision 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.