Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 8 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Bumby & Stimpson, Inc. v. Peninsula Utilities Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bumby & Stimpson, Inc. v. Peninsula Utilities Corp. Anchor | green | “excessive participation of the trial judge, such as by excessive questioning of witnesses, may amount to usurping the functions of counsel and be an abuse of the discretion and latitude of the court in such respects, with resultant injury to the rights of a party or parties.” | 4 |
| 2 | Moton v. State | green | “the very status of the judge as interrogator inevitably means that the answers given by the witness will assume an importance in the minds of jurors otherwise lacking if counsel had instead asked the questions.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.