GOLDSTEIN

v.

WASHINGTON; ACUFF V. COOK MACHINERY CO., INC.; CLINE V. DUNBAR

Citator

Cited By

• Palmore v. United States, 411 U.S. 389 (U.S. 1973)
  …t are kin to those approved today; and the important ones are reviewed by Prof. Kurland.9 To date efforts to tamper with the federal judiciary have not been successful, unless it be the bizarre decision of this Court in Chandler v. Judicial Council, 382 U. S. 1003, 1004, in which Mr. Justice Black and I dissented. The States, of course, have mostly gone the other way.10 But as Prof. Kurland observed:11 “[T]he various devices that the States have recently adopted for policing their judiciaries are little more…
• Chandler v. Jud. Council of the Tenth Cir., 398 U.S. 74 (U.S. 1970)
  …ied on January 21, 1966, on the ground that the Order was “entirely interlocutory in character pending prompt further proceedings . . . and that at such proceedings Judge Chandler will be permitted to appear before the Council, with counsel . . . .” 382 U. S. 1003. On January 24, 1966, Judge Chandler addressed a letter to his fellow district judges indicating that he objected to the removal and reassignment of cases previously assigned and pending before him on December 28, 1965, but that he was not in disag…

  ← 1 / 4 →
• Pacemaker Diagnostic Clinic OF Am., Inc. v. Instromedix, Inc., 725 F.2d 537 (9th Cir. 1984)
  …Debate on Judicial Supervision of Federal Trial Judges 43 (July 23, 1973) (unpublished paper)). Professor Kurland declared himself in “wholehearted agreement” with Justice Black’s dissent from the denial of a stay in Chandler v. Judicial Council, 382 U.S. 1003, 86 S.Ct. 610, 15 L.Ed.2d 494 (1966) (mem.), which stated: One of the great advances made in the structure of government by our Constitution was its provision for an independent judiciary — for judges who could do their duty as they saw it without…