28 U.S.C. § 295
Conditions upon designation and assignment
No designation and assignment of a circuit or district judge in active service shall be made without the consent of the chief judge or judicial council of the circuit from which the judge is to be designated and assigned. No designation and assignment of a judge of any other court of the United States in active service shall be made without the consent of the chief judge of such court.
All designations and assignments of justices and judges shall be filed with the clerks and entered on the minutes of the courts from and to which made.
The Chief Justice of the United States, a circuit justice or a chief judge of a circuit may make new designation and assignments in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and may revoke those previously made by him.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases, 1950–2019 · leading case: Glidden Co. v. Zdanok
Glidden Co. v. Zdanok (1962)
“If nothing else, the authority given the Chief Justice in 28 U. S. C. § 295 to revoke assignments previously made is wholly inconsistent with a reading of the statute as empowering him to appoint inferior Article III judges.”
Chandler v. Judicial Council of the Tenth Circuit (1970)
“§ 142 ; to consent to the designation and assignment of circuit or district judges to sit on courts other than those for which they are appointed, 28 U. S. C. § 295 ; to certify to the President *110 that a circuit or district judge is unable to discharge efficiently all the…”
John Leary v. United States (1959)
““A justice or judge who has sat by designation and assignment in another district or circuit may, notwithstanding his absence from such district or circuit or the expiration of the period of his designation and assignment, decide or join in the decision and final disposition of…”
In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Practices Litigation (2013)
“• Consent Form for Active Judges Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 295 , intercireuit assignments forjudges in active status require the consent of their chief circuit judge (judges of the Court of international Trade in active status need the consent of their chief judge).”
Steckel v. Lurie (1950)
“Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 295 . In this case, the designation, having been made by the chief judge of the circuit, was valid until its expiration or revocation.”
Crim v. Commissioner (1988)
“§ 294 (a), is ordered entered on the minutes of this Court, pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 295 .”
Colas Solutions, Inc. v. Blacklidge Emulsions, Inc. (2019)
“We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 295 (a)(4)(A). DISCUSSION Colas does not challenge the Board’s rejection of its in- herency theory.”
Lee v. Texas (1973)
“§ 294 (a), is ordered entered on the minutes of this Court, pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 295 . An order of The Chief Justice designating and assigning Mr.”
Johnson v. United States (1969)
“§ 294 (a), is ordered entered on the minutes of this Court, pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 295 . An order of The Chief Justice designating and assigning Mr.”
Lee v. Autauga County Board of Education (1999)
“The faculty and families of Autaugaville deserve a chance to educate their students in facilities truly equal to those of Autauga County’s White majority. The court believes this is a chance worth taking.”
Campbell v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance (1986)
“The designation of the Court for service in the Southern District Court of Texas, by its terms and by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 295 , confers the power on the designee to dispose of all further proceedings arising in the matters submitted to him under the designation.”
Crim v. Commissioner (1988)
“§ 294 (a), is ordered entered on the minutes of this Court, pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 295 .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.