Mississippi Supreme Court· 12/18/1991
Buchanan v. Buchanan
Citations
- 587 So. 2d 892
- 1991 WL 198668
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that the “Canon’s concept of interest refers to a legal interest that will be affected by the final judgment”
- party who knew of grounds for judge's recusal could not wait until after adverse verdict to file a motion, the point is deemed waived
- the court “will not allow a party to take his chances with a judge about whom he knows of grounds for recusal and then, after he loses, file his motion”
- a court “will not allow a party to take his chances with a judge about whom he knows of grounds for recusal and then, after he loses, file his motion”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dan M. Lee, P.J., and Robertson and Banks
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
83 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Evans v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1997-09-11· cited 404×
- Hunter v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1996-12-05· cited 307×
- Johnson v. GrayMississippi Supreme Court· 2003-11-20· cited 146×
- Bishop v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 2002-02-14· cited 135×
- Green v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1994-01-20· cited 131×
- Payton v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 2003-11-06· cited 106×
- Banana v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1994-03-31· cited 81×
- Franklin v. Franklin Ex Rel. PhillipsMississippi Supreme Court· 2003-02-13· cited 65×
- Jones v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 2003-03-27· cited 62×
- Tubwell v. GrantMississippi Supreme Court· 2000-01-13· cited 60×
- Collins v. JoshiMississippi Supreme Court· 1992-12-17· cited 58×
- Bryan v. HolzerMississippi Supreme Court· 1991-11-06· cited 54×
- Hammers v. HammersCourt of Appeals of Mississippi· 2004-08-03· cited 44×
- Copeland v. CopelandMississippi Supreme Court· 2004-12-16· cited 43×
- Davis v. Neshoba County General Hosp.Mississippi Supreme Court· 1992-12-17· cited 41×
- In Re Conservatorship of BardwellMississippi Supreme Court· 2003-07-17· cited 38×
- Jerome v. StroudMississippi Supreme Court· 1997-02-20· cited 34×
- Hathcock v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court· 2005-03-17· cited 27×
- Garrison v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1998-06-18· cited 25×
- Neal v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1996-08-08· cited 25×
Cites
19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Albright v. AlbrightMississippi Supreme Court· 1983-09-21· cited 678×
- Turner v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1990-12-12· cited 313×
- Rutland v. PridgenMississippi Supreme Court· 1986-08-27· cited 97×
- Bell v. BellMississippi Supreme Court· 1990-12-12· cited 88×
- Spain v. HollandMississippi Supreme Court· 1986-01-22· cited 74×
- Jenkins v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1990-11-07· cited 67×
- Hill v. ThompsonMississippi Supreme Court· 1989-10-11· cited 55×
- Jenkins v. FORREST COUNTY GENERAL HOSP.Mississippi Supreme Court· 1989-05-17· cited 52×
- McManus v. HowardMississippi Supreme Court· 1990-10-24· cited 51×
- Cantrell v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1987-04-22· cited 46×
- Hammond v. GrissomMississippi Supreme Court· 1985-05-29· cited 46×
- Ryals v. PigottMississippi Supreme Court· 1990-11-28· cited 46×
- Collins v. Dixie Transport, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court· 1989-04-05· cited 37×
- Tom's Foods, Inc. v. CarnSupreme Court of Alabama· 2004-08-20· cited 33×
- City of Biloxi v. CawleyMississippi Supreme Court· 1976-05-25· cited 25×
- Murray v. PayneMississippi Supreme Court· 1983-09-07· cited 21×
- Robinson v. IrwinMississippi Supreme Court· 1989-06-21· cited 19×
- Pearson v. PearsonMississippi Supreme Court· 1984-09-26· cited 19×
- In Re MoffettMississippi Supreme Court· 1990-01-31· cited 14×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.