Because a visiting judge used a subjective, instead of objective, legal standard in deciding a disqualification and recusal motion, an Austin lawyer convicted of theft from the Pedernales Electric Cooperative will get a second chance to argue that the trial judge shouldn't have presided over his case.
The 3rd Court of Appeals has abated the appeal filed by former Clark, Thomas & Winters shareholder Walter Demond and remanded the case. The Austin appellate court instructed the visiting judge, Senior Judge Bert Richardson, to use a different legal standard during a new disqualification and recusal hearing regarding 424th District Judge Daniel H. Mills.
This content has been archived.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]
