Skip to content


Hanrahan Vs. Hampton - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number446 U.S. 1301
AppellantHanrahan
RespondentHampton
Excerpt:
.....april 30, 1980 * 446 u.s. 1301 on motion to recuse motion to recuse mr. justice rehnquist is denied. mr. justice rehnquist. plaintiffs-respondents and their counsel in these cases have moved that i "be recused from the proceedings in this case" for the reasons stated in their 14-page motion and their five appendices filed with the clerk of this court on april 3, 1980. the motion is opposed by the state-defendant petitioners in the action. since generally the court as an institution leaves such motions, even though they be addressed to it, to the decision of the individual justices to whom they refer, see jewell ridge coal corp. v. mine workers, 325 u. s. 897 (1945) (denial of petition for rehearing) (jackson, j., concurring), i shall treat.....
Judgment:
Hanrahan v. Hampton - 446 U.S. 1301 (1980)
U.S. Supreme Court Hanrahan v. Hampton, 446 U.S. 1301 (1980)

Hanrahan v. Hampton

No. 79-912

Decided April 30, 1980 *

446 U.S. 1301

ON MOTION TO RECUSE

Motion to recuse MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST is denied.

MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST.

Plaintiffs-respondents and their counsel in these cases have moved that I "be recused from the proceedings in this case" for the reasons stated in their 14-page motion and their five Appendices filed with the Clerk of this Court on April 3, 1980. The motion is opposed by the state-defendant petitioners in the action. Since generally the Court as an institution leaves such motions, even though they be addressed to it, to the decision of the individual Justices to whom they refer, see Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. Mine Workers, 325 U. S. 897 (1945) (denial of petition for rehearing) (Jackson, J., concurring), I shall treat the motion as addressed to me individually. I have considered the motion, the Appendices, the response of the state defendants, 28 U.S.C. § 455 (1976 ed. and Supp. III), and the current American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct, and the motion is accordingly

Denied.

* Together with No. 79-914, Johnson et al. v. Hampton et al.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //