Which school of thought applies to judges? That's a question for the New Jersey Supreme Court.
Recently in Ethics Category
Wait… the Paul Bergrin trial wasn’t the only trial that Judge William J. Martini was removed from last week?
Judge Martini was having a really bad Friday last week because he was removed from not one, but two cases on that same day. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals also removed him from U.S. v. Kennedy, which is now in its sentencing phase, reports the New Jersey Ledger.
Is judicial bias an issue in the Third Circuit?
According to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, the reassignment of a case to a different judge is an "extraordinary remedy that should seldom be applied," but recently, the court applied this remedy.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling on Friday which called into question the impartiality of a federal district court judge in the criminal prosecution of former criminal defense lawyer Paul Bergrin.
The 50-page ruling directed the district court to reassign the matter to a different judge. The matter had previously been heard in the courtroom of U.S. District Judge William Martini.
If you’ve ever argued in federal court, you know that the judge is a gatekeeper who can make or break your case. So it’s not unusual that an attorney might feel that the judge is leaning towards or against a particular side. But removing a judge isn’t always an option. Recently, however, the Third Circuit considered claims that a judge was biased and had the judge removed from a case.
In a filing on March 28, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit removed U.S. District Court Judge Arthur J. Schwab from a case after lawyers for West Penn Allegheny alleged that he was biased. The lawyers claimed that Judge Schwab exhibited a “worrisome practice of misstating and mischaracterizing” their positions, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.