My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Case No. 01SA252 Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Justice Hobbs and Motion for Disqualification March 2002
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Case No. 01SA252 Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Justice Hobbs and Motion for Disqualification March 2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2012 10:28:21 AM
Creation date
7/12/2012 4:20:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Case No. 01SA252 Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Justice Hobbs and Motion for Disqualification March 2002
State
CO
Date
3/27/2002
Author
Porzak, Glenn E.; Bushong, Steven J.; Holleman, P. Fritz
Title
Case No. 01SA252 Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Justice Hobbs and Motion for Disqualification March 2002
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.
/
12
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
I. Rules, Statutes and Cannons Relevant to Conflicts of Interest. <br />Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 97 states: <br />A judge shall be disqualified in an action in which he is interested or prejudiced, <br />or has been of counsel for any parry, or is so related or connected with any party <br />or his attorney as to render it improper for him to sit on the trial, appeal, or other <br />proceeding therein.... [A]ny party may move for such disqualification and a <br />motion by a party for disqualification shall be supported by affidavit. <br />Colorado Revised Statute § 13 -1 -122, directs in pertinent part: <br />A judge shall not act as such in any of the following cases: In an action or <br />proceeding ... in which he is interested ... or when he has been attorney or <br />counsel for either party in the action or proceeding, unless by consent of all <br />parties to the action. <br />Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3(C) states in pertinent part: <br />(1) A judge should disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the <br />judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to <br />instances where: <br />(a) A judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal <br />knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding; <br />(b) a judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer <br />with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such <br />association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer <br />has been a material witness concerning it .... <br />The purpose of these rules is to ensure a fair and impartial hearing and prevent parties <br />from having to litigate before a judge with a "bent of mind." Groebel v. Benton, 830 P.2d 995, <br />998 (Colo. 1992); Board of County Commissioner's v. Blanning, 479 P.2d 404 (Colo. 1970). <br />The Court's duty is to "eliminate every semblance of reasonable doubt or suspicion that a trial by <br />a fair and impartial tribunal may be denied." Johnson v. District Court, 674 P.2d 952, 956 <br />(Colo. 1984). Disqualification is required in a situation that presents even the appearance of <br />possible bias or prejudice. See People v. District Court, 560 P.2d 828, 831 -32 (1977) (quoting <br />Ph0438 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.