Robb v. Robb’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““These grounds of disqualification (constitutional and statutory) of a judge have long been held to be both inclusive and exclusive ... all of this has now been changed by the Supreme Court’s decision in McLeod v. Harris ... We are bound by that decision and follow it in this case, but we are not precluded from questioning its soundness, for the Constitution cannot be amended by judicial fiat. Or, if we misconstrue the opinion, and bias and prejudice and the Code of Judicial Conduct are not grounds for disqualification of a judge, then what reason is there for mandating a hearing on a motion alleging such cases to re-cuse?” See also The Society of Separationists, Inc. v. Strobel, 593 S.W.2d 855, 856 (Tex.Civ.App.—Austin 1980, no writ). Cf. Wiegand v. Wiegand, 606 S.W.2d 352 (Tex.Civ.App.—San Antonio 1980, no writ).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Manges v. Garcia · State Ex Rel. Millsap v. Lozano

2. “A district judge shall request the Presiding Judge to assign a judge of the Administrative District to hear any motions to recuse such district judge from a case pending in his court. TEX.REV.CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 200a, § 6 (Vernon 1977).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gaines v. Gaines