Tatham v. Rogers
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtSiddoway, J.
¶1 Washington’s appearance of fairness doctrine not only requires a judge to be impartial, it also requires that the judge appear to be impartial. State v. Finch, 137 Wn.2d 792, 808, 975 P.2d 967 (1999). This case calls upon us to decide whether, and by what standard, James Rogers1 may obtain relief from a judgment where he learned of facts following trial, previously unknown, that give rise to a reasonable concern that he did not receive a *81fair, impartial, and neutral hearing. A reasonable concern can exist even where there is no proof of actual bias.
¶2 We hold that a violation of the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Tumey v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Withrow v. LarkinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- In Re Murchison.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Bracy v. GramleySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Diane L. Charette v. Dale N. CharetteSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2013
- Kok v. Tacoma School District No. 10Court of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- State of Washington v. Daniel BlizzardCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- Hayes v. HayesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- Samsara Memorial Trust v. Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman Kelly, Remmel & Zimmerman v. Raisin Memorial TrustSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2014
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.