08-3187 Volume Appendix15.pdf - Medical Supply Chain

activities." A judge should be above the fray; he or she should not be
influenced by, or appear to be caught up in or contribute to, public clamor.
When a judge becomes embroiled in a controversy, the line between the
judge and the controversy before the court becomes blurred, and the judge's
impartiality or appearance of impartiality may become compromised. Here,
the Judge's public comments presented the risk of involving the Judge as an
actor in the events, and, at least in the public's perception, could present the
appearance that the Judge's impartiality and objectivity had been
compromised.
Indeed, the Judge's comments led the Tenth Circuit to vacate and
remand several of the decisions relating to this case because the Court of
Appeals found an appearance that the Judge was biased so as to necessitate
recusal. As a result of the Judge's public comments, each of these cases had
to be reheard in front of a new judge.”
Charge of Judicial Misconduct, In re, 47 F.3d 399 (C.A.10 (Jud.C.), 1995).
C. Vacatur Under 455 Is Appropriate
The damage done by the respondent is to great for the judicial counsel to
avoid taking action:
(a) risk of injustice to the parties in the particular case
The sole reason the defendants to the petitioner’s Missouri State Law
Antitrust action are not in a federal court and now cannot obtain removal to a
federal court is the respondent’s failure to follow controlling US Supreme Court
and Tenth Circuit case law adopting the transactional approach to preclusion or res
judicata. The petitioner fully briefed the controlling precedent and quoted
treatises and even traced this principle from Lawlor to the current decisions of the
Tenth Circuit.
Instead, the respondent colluded with the defendants’ local counsel who
were even unaware of the conduct or interests of their clients and the respondent
30
08-3187 Medical Supply Chain vs. Neoforma Volume XV 5725