HANRAHAN Et Al. v. HAMPTON Et Al.

Supreme Court

HANRAHAN Et Al. v. HAMPTON Et Al.

446 U.S. 1301, 100 S. Ct. 1868, 64 L. Ed. 2d 214, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 2309

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 30, 1980

Docket79-912

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 446 U.S. 1301 (HANRAHAN Et Al. v. HAMPTON Et Al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

HANRAHAN Et Al. v. HAMPTON Et Al., 446 U.S. 1301, 100 S. Ct. 1868, 64 L. Ed. 2d 214, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 2309 (1980).

Pincite

Opinion

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. Ill), and the current American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct, and the motion is accordingly

Denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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. Ill), and the current American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct, and the motion is accordingly

Denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

446 U.S. 1301, 100 S. Ct. 1868, 64 L. Ed. 2d 214, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 2309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hanrahan-et-al-v-hampton-et-al-scotus-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack