Smith v. Sikorsky Aircraft
District Court, C.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER TO REASSIGN CASE AND NOTICE TO COUNSEL
HAUK, District Judge.
The undersigned Judge, to whom the above-entitled case was assigned pursuant to Local Rule 2, is of the opinion that he should not proceed further in said case by reason of the facts that:(1) He has just learned today, August 19, 1976, that the law firm of Nichols and Rose, representing plaintiffs, had on August 17, 1976, associated Richard A. Perkins, Esq. as counsel for plaintiffs herein.(2) The said Richard A. Perkins, Esq., has in the past been and acted as attorney and counsel for the undersigned Judge, both personally and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hauk v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Rosalio U. Munoz and Michael E. Tigar v. Hon. A. Andrew Hauk and Hon. Jesse W. CurtisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
3Cited by21 opinions
- Potashnick v. Port City Construction Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- United States v. ConforteDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1978
- Powell v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- McKeague v. TalbertHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1983
- Yorita v. OkumotoHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1982
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.