Stone v. Baum

How courts have described this case

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

• describing a complaint as 3 “impossible” to answer where it liberally used “the Defendants” across “64 pages and 265 4 predicate acts alleged . . . to support its 9 counts”
• “A judges’ prior ruling in a case is absolutely not a basis for recusal.” (emphasis removed)
• “A judges’ prior ruling in a case is absolutely not a basis for recusal.”
• \A judges= prior ruling in a case is absolutely not a basis for recusal.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).