State, Department of Transportation & Development v. James

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that to satisfy § 144, allegations in an affidavit “must be definite as to time, place, persons, and circumstances” and may not be “merely of a conclusionary nature”
• finding no prejudice from pretrial press coverage despite the presence of articles “hostile in tone and accusatory in content”
• describing defendants' \commitments\ to pay the burglars hush money and detailing defendants' extensive conspiracy to raise, transfer, deliver, and conceal the hush money payments
• describing defendants’ “commitments” to pay the burglars hush money and detailing defendants’ extensive conspiracy to raise, transfer, deliver, and conceal the hush money payments
• counseling against a “pre-voir dire conclusion” that “a fair jury cannot be selected”
• counseling against a “‘pre-voir dire conclusion” that “a fair jury cannot be selected”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).