On Halloween, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for New York’s Second Circuit threw U.S. District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin off her “Stop and Frisk” cases, reaction was swift but dissonant. The court said Scheindlin appeared to be biased in how she presided over the cases and in interviews with reporters. “This ruling makes me wonder about the objectivity of the appeals court, not Judge Scheindlin,” said Orlando attorney Ralph Losey. Austin attorney Craig Ball : “I’ve heard Judge Scheindlin speak more times than I can count … and never heard her make an improper comment about a case before her. Yes, she can be plain-spoken and pugilistic in defense of her views. Hooray for that!” But one New York defense lawyer said the court “correctly perceived that she had prejudged the … case, and had used it as a platform to advance her personal political agenda.”
David Horrigan , a Boston-based attorney at 451 Research, observed that most cases are not so politically charged. “Had Judge Scheindlin been giving interviews on legal holds and 26(f) conferences, I don’t think we would have seen such a decision.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
