Skip to main content
· 9/7/1988

Malloy v. Lee County

Citations

  • 694 F. Supp. 851
  • 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10211
  • 48 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 38,583
  • 48 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 532
  • 1988 WL 94051

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • explaining that “the right to retain counsel in civil litigation is implicit in the concept of fifth amendment due process”
  • explaining a litigant “requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings”
  • explaining a litigant “requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings”
  • “Historically and in practice, the right to a hearing has always included the right to the aid of counsel when desired and provided by the party asserting the right.”
  • where plaintiff’s lead counsel was representing judge at the time of trial in personal, unrelated, matters and the judge’s father was a member of plaintiff’s counsel’s law firm, recusal was required
  • “[W]hen a partner in a law firm is related to a judge within the third degree, that partner will always be known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of a proceeding involving the partner’s law firm”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kovachevich

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.