My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Notice of Apparent Positional Bias and Motion for Disqualification of Justice Hobbs, With Authorities
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Notice of Apparent Positional Bias and Motion for Disqualification of Justice Hobbs, With Authorities
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:41:42 PM
Creation date
7/29/2009 2:50:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.2F
Description
Colorado Supreme Court Appeal
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
4
Date
8/23/2004
Author
Cynthia F. Covell
Title
Notice of Apparent Positional Bias and Motion for Disqualification of Justice Hobbs, With Authorities
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
"Courts must meticulously avoid any appearance of partiality, not merely to secure the <br />confidence of the litigants immediately involved, but `to retain public resp ect and secure willing a.rid <br />ready obedience to their judgments. "' People v. District Courtln and For Third Judicial Dist., 192 <br />Colo. 503, 508, 560 P.2d 828, 831-32 (1977) (citingNoYdloh v. PackaYd, 45 Colo. 515, 521, 101 P. <br />787, 790 (1909)). Upper Gunnison, a local government entity, must itself be confident, and must <br />be able to assure its taxpaying constituents, that this appeal will be reviewed fairly and impartially <br />on its merits. Here, Justice Hobbs' recusal in the Golden cases, his past.involvement in Fort Collins, <br />the very case that is ta be interpreted here, and his recent extrajudicial statements all create the <br />appearance of a positional bias which, under the circumstances, mandates his disqualification. <br />M. THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES CREATES THE APPEARANCE THAT <br />JUSTYCE HOBBS HAS A POSITIONAL BIAS REGARDING RECREA.TIONAL IN- <br />CHANNEL WATER RIGHTS. <br />A. Justice Hobbs Participated as an Attorney in. Fort Collins, and the CWCB <br />Echoes his Arguments. in .this Appeal. <br />Prior to his appointrnent to the Supreme Court, Justice Hobbs participated actively in FoYt <br />Collins as counsel for Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District ("Northern"), his then long- <br />standing client.' In the appeal of that case, Justice Hobbs asserted that the water court properly <br />752. Although this situation more often arises when judicial applicants are asked to express their <br />views on particular issues that will come before them if they are chosen as judges, in the case of <br />both applican.ts and judges, "[i]t is a delicate matter ... to express those views in generalities <br />while still preserving tlie ability to hear individual cases without being zightfully accused of <br />having prejudged the outcome." See Kourlis, supra at 750. <br />' Justice Hobbs represented Northem; for most, if not all, of his seventeen-year career in <br />private practice. Covell aff. ¶. 2, Attachment B.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.