Summary
discussing similarly interpreted provision of 28 U.S.C. § 144
Summary of this case from In re X-Cel, Inc.Opinion
No. 83-1381.
May 14, 1984.
C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 714 F. 2d 928.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Feinstein et al. v. Nettleship Co. of Los Angeles
U.S.
May 14, 1984
466 U.S. 972 (1984)
Summaries of
Feinstein et al. v. Nettleship Co. of Los Angeles
U.S.
May 14, 1984
466 U.S. 972 (1984)
discussing similarly interpreted provision of 28 U.S.C. § 144
Summary of this case from In re X-Cel, Inc.construing the Agricultural Labor Relations Act, Cal.Labor Code § 1140 et seq.
Summary of this case from In re AnkenyCase details for
Feinstein et al. v. Nettleship Co. of Los Angeles
Case Details
Full title:FEINSTEIN ET AL. v. NETTLESHIP CO. OF LOS ANGELES et al
Court:U.S.
Date published: May 14, 1984
Citations
466 U.S. 972 (1984)
Citing Cases
Matter of Stanton
We adopted the Board's findings and recommended sanctions for such violations in In re Stanton, 470 A.2d 272…
Lieb v. Tillman (In re Lieb)Circuit Courts have refused to base disqualification under section 455 upon apparent animosity towards…