Ham v. Wenneker
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
On this appeal, the ruling of the trial court dismissing plaintiffs’ petition as premature must be reversed.
During the trial, evidence was presented which the trial judge felt obligated the court to exercise the duty of recusal. In a commendable effort to salvage the time and effort already expended in the trial, the trial judge inquired if anyone objected to the trial proceeding. No objection was registered, and the trial was concluded.
The duty of a trial judge to recuse when impropriety or the appearance of impropriety appears does not depend on the waiver of the issue by the parties. When…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Barlett Ex Rel. Barlett v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1993
- State ex rel. Division of Family Services v. OatsvallMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
- Jetz Service Co. v. ChamberlainMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991
- State Ex Rel. Div. of Family Serv. v. OatsvallMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
- Grant v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.