holding recusal may be required even in summary contempt proceeding if there is “a sufficient possibility of bias to make disqualification necessary to preserve the integrity of the judiciary”
How later courts described this case
- holding recusal may be required even in summary contempt proceeding if there is “a sufficient possibility of bias to make disqualification necessary to preserve the integrity of the judiciary”
- "[O]nce a judge has been personally attacked in such a manner that a judge of ordinary sensibilities might naturally be expected to harbor marked personal feelings against the attacker, the law must assume that such feelings exist." (quotation marks and emphasis omitted)
- “[0]nce a judge has been personally attacked in such a manner that a judge of ordinary sensibilities might naturally be expected to harbor marked personal feelings against the attacker, the law must assume that such feelings exist.” (quotation marks and emphasis omitted)
- describing necessity for recusal when the judge “has adopted an adversary posture with respect to the alleged contemnor, as in Murchison and Johnson ”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
TAMM, Circuit Judge
(concurring):
I concur in the disposition made of this case. In doing so I distinguish this case upon a factual basis from our recent opinion in In re Brown, 147 U.S. App.D.C.-, 454 F.2d 999 (1971). The obvious and pronounced differences between the circumstances resulting in our Brown opinion and the factors in the present ease require me to distinguish our present case from that of Brown.