Fred B. Collier v. Honorable Frank A. Picard, United States Dist. Judge for the E. Dist. of Michigan, S. Div., 237 F.2d 234 (6th Cir. 1956). · Go Syfert
Search
Fred B. Collier v. Honorable Frank A. Picard, United States Dist. Judge for the E. Dist. of Michigan, S. Div., 237 F.2d 234 (6th Cir. 1956). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Nathaniel Wilson (ca6, 1990-11-28)
Treatment trajectory · 1958 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1958 1992 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Nathaniel Wilson
6th Cir. · 1990 · confidence medium
In re: City of Detroit, 828 F.2d 1160, 1165 (6th Cir.1987) (per curiam); Albert v. United States District Court, 283 F.2d 61 , 62 (6th Cir.1960), cert. denied, 365 U.S. 828 (1961); Collier v. Picard, 237 F.2d 234, 235 (6th Cir.1956) (per curiam).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lulee Harris, Linda A. Hampton, Attorney-Petitioner v. Malone & Hyde, Doing Business as Auto Shack
6th Cir. · 1988 · confidence medium
In addition, the respondent correctly states that an order denying a motion to disqualify is not reviewable on direct appeal, In re City of Detroit, 828 F.2d 1160, 1165 (6th Cir.1987) (per curiam); Collier v. Picard, 237 F.2d 234, 235 (6th Cir.1956), or by writ of mandamus.
cited Cited as authority (rule) In Re City of Detroit, Detroit Water and Sewerage Department
6th Cir. · 1987 · confidence medium
Collier v. Picard, 237 F.2d 234, 235 (6th Cir.1956).
discussed Cited "see" Securities & Exchange Commission v. Smith
6th Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Collier v. Picard, 237 F.2d 234, 234 (6th Cir.1956) (holding that jurisdiction exists to review an appeal from an order rejecting disqualification under § 455(a) only upon the proper appeal of an interlocutory order or a final decision in the proceeding in which the disqualification motion was filed).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Fred B. COLLIER Et Al., Appellants,
v.
Honorable Frank A. PICARD, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, Appellee
12951_1.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Sep 19, 1956.
237 F.2d 234
1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 2888
Fred B. Collier, Royal Oak, Mich., Philip Pratt and Clarence L. Smith, Pontiac, Mich., for appellant., No appearance for appellee.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 19 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

A motion has been filed to dismiss this appeal from an order of a district judge refusing to disqualify himself in a proceeding in response to a motion and affidavit of bias or prejudice filed under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A. § 144.

The order of which the appellants complain is not appealable. It is not a final decision, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1291; it is not such an interlocutory order or decree as is described in 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292. In re Chicago Rapid Transit Co., 7 Cir., 1953, 200 F.2d 341, 343, 33 A.L.R.2d 1360; Skirvin v. Mesta, 10 Cir., 1944, 141 F.2d 668, 671. The denial of a motion and affidavit of bias or prejudice filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 144 can be reviewed upon appeal of an interlocutory order which is appealable or upon appeal from the final decision in the proceeding in which the motion and affidavit were filed. See Korer v. Hoffman, 7 Cir., 1954, 212 F.2d 211, 213, 45 A.L.R.2d 930.

The motion to dismiss this appeal was filed by the Federal Housing Administration. Its standing to make the motion is questionable, since it has not been named as an appellee. A court of appeals has the duty, however, on its own motion to dismiss an appeal which it does not have jurisdiction to hear.

The present appeal in this cause is therefore dismissed.