Yes, it seems that he should recuse himself. * Legally, no. Judges and attorneys on both sides attend the same church, belong to the same social clubs, attend social events, and so forth. This does not constitute unethical practice or favoritism. Such allegations would have to be based on solid evidence that the judge made a decision founded on the relationship between his or herself and the client or legal counsel in question. Judges are only required excuse themselves from cases in which there may be a direct conflict of interest, such as being a partner in a business, being related to a defendant or plaintiff, and so forth. The issue of a judge and attorney or client interacting DURING a trial can be grounds for a mistrial motion or an appeal.
Anytime a judge has a conflict of interest in a lawsuit he should recuse himself. Reasons a plaintiff can ask for recusal include the judge is related to, is a friend of or a business partner with defendant. Or if the lawsuit is against a company the judge has invested in and a judgment against the company might harm his investment. Or that the judge had worked with defendant's law firm or been partner's together. Or that there had been some altercation or disagreement between plaintiff or plaintiff's lawyer and the judge do that it might appear that the judge would be prejudiced against the plaintiff. Lawyers and judges are expected not only to avoid improprieties like those but also to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. This means that even if an investigation into an alleged conflict of interest shows no actual conflict of interest, the judge should probably recuse himself if it appears to be a conflict.
passive aggressive conflict occurs in what stage?
There is no such conflict. Abraham and his grandson Israel were never in conflict according to the Bible. There is also no conflict between the patriarch Abraham and the Modern State of Israel.
that is not a complete sentence do you mean what the conflict around hitlers daughter or the conflict for hitlers daughter ?
No, there has not been a conflict.
No. That would constitute a classic conflict of interest and self dealing.
I should imagine that there would be!!I can only presume that the relationship goes further as they also reside together?!
No, it would be a conflict of interest. Confusing Query I shall assume that what the querist is asking is, can the attorney who defended he or she in a criminal trial become his or her legal representative in a civil suit against the state for 'malicious prosecution'. If that is indeed the case, then there would not be a conflict of interest and the plaintiff may use whomever he or she choose to represent them. It would likely be beneficial to the client to retain the same attorney as he or she would be quite familiar with the specifics of the case.
no
That attorney has a conflict of interest.
Absoultely! If your soon-to-be ex husband is in a relationship with this woman it is a serious conflict. How can you expect to get fair and unbiased legal representation? Find another attorney, file against this attorney for conflict of interest and get on with the divorce!
I believe that any lawyer would consider this to be a conflict of interest, and not allowed.
Yes, it could be considered a conflict of interest due to the potential bias or influence that the ex-wife's connection may have on the legal proceedings. It's advisable to seek legal counsel from someone who does not have a direct relationship with any involved parties.
Anytime a judge has a conflict of interest in a lawsuit he should recuse himself. Reasons a plaintiff can ask for recusal include the judge is related to, is a friend of or a business partner with defendant. Or if the lawsuit is against a company the judge has invested in and a judgment against the company might harm his investment. Or that the judge had worked with defendant's law firm or been partner's together. Or that there had been some altercation or disagreement between plaintiff or plaintiff's lawyer and the judge do that it might appear that the judge would be prejudiced against the plaintiff. Lawyers and judges are expected not only to avoid improprieties like those but also to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. This means that even if an investigation into an alleged conflict of interest shows no actual conflict of interest, the judge should probably recuse himself if it appears to be a conflict.
Anytime a judge has a conflict of interest in a lawsuit he should recuse himself. Reasons a plaintiff can ask for recusal include the judge is related to, is a friend of or a business partner with defendant. Or if the lawsuit is against a company the judge has invested in and a judgment against the company might harm his investment. Or that the judge had worked with defendant's law firm or been partner's together. Or that there had been some altercation or disagreement between plaintiff or plaintiff's lawyer and the judge do that it might appear that the judge would be prejudiced against the plaintiff. Lawyers and judges are expected not only to avoid improprieties like those but also to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. This means that even if an investigation into an alleged conflict of interest shows no actual conflict of interest, the judge should probably recuse himself if it appears to be a conflict.
not if her case is finished. also if they are separate cases that doesn't deal directly with your granny and you ex then the attorney can accept both cases without conflict of interest.
Yes. That would be a conflict of interest.