FTC knew the judges son works at Microsoft and this court/judge was pretty much their choice (Microsoft wanted a different judge in a different jurisdiction)
The FTC will never ask for a recursal. I know I would not. You cannot blatantly call a judge corrupt especially when you are a participant in that case.
If you are in the judiciary, your standards must be higher.
From the article:-
“Nothing antagonizes a judge with whom you might have litigation in the future like calling them recklessly biased,” he said. “What are the odds that Judge Corley would recuse if she was already choosing to brazen her way through this apparent conflict of interest?”
>The FTC will never ask for a recursal. I know I would not. You cannot blatantly call a judge corrupt especially when you are a participant in that case.
of course not. Law has much prettier words for that that the FTC could have used. The same words the article uses (they never use "corrupt" in the watchdog quotes).
Besides, I agree with the professor's arguments:
>“A rank-and-file employee at Microsoft would probably not have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of this case. … She's right to look at [the fact that] the division that would be affected by the litigation is not where her son is employed,” he said.
It's the equivalent of some Wal-Mart lawsuit where a judge's grandson is working part time at Wal-Mart.
