Person v. General Motors Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a judge’s recusal in a prior case involving a party is not alone sufficient for disqualification in a later case involving that party
• “[E]ven assuming arguendo that in the past I have treated counsel brusquely in court, that is insufficient to compel recusal.”
• “[c]ounsel’s allegations are generally so vague, conclusory, and unsubstantiated that they are utterly inadequate to require recusal[;] . . . [c]onclusory statements are of no effect[;] [n]or are counsel’s unsupported beliefs and assumptions”
• “[c]ounsel’s allegations are generally so vague, conclusory, and unsubstantiated that they are utterly inadequate to require recusal[;] . . . [c]onclusory statements are of no effect[;] [n]or are counsel’s unsupported beliefs and assumptions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).