U.S. Code » Title 28 » Part PART I— ORGANIZATION OF COURTS › Chapter CHAPTER 16— COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE

28 U.S.C. § 352

Review of complaint by chief judge

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Expeditious Review; Limited Inquiry.—The chief judge shall expeditiously review any complaint received under section 351(a) or identified under section 351(b). In determining what action to take, the chief judge may conduct a limited inquiry for the purpose of determining—(1) whether appropriate corrective action has been or can be taken without the necessity for a formal investigation; and(2) whether the facts stated in the complaint are either plainly untrue or are incapable of being established through investigation.For this purpose, the chief judge may request the judge whose conduct is complained of to file a written response to the complaint. Such response shall not be made available to the complainant unless authorized by the judge filing the response. The chief judge or his or her designee may also communicate orally or in writing with the complainant, the judge whose conduct is complained of, and any other person who may have knowledge of the matter, and may review any transcripts or other relevant documents. The chief judge shall not undertake to make findings of fact about any matter that is reasonably in dispute.(b)Action by Chief Judge Following Review.—After expeditiously reviewing a complaint under subsection (a), the chief judge, by written order stating his or her reasons, may—(1) dismiss the complaint—(A) if the chief judge finds the complaint to be—(i) not in conformity with section 351(a);(ii) directly related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling; or(iii) frivolous, lacking sufficient evidence to raise an inference that misconduct has occurred, or containing allegations which are incapable of being established through investigation; or(B) when a limited inquiry conducted under subsection (a) demonstrates that the allegations in the complaint lack any factual foundation or are conclusively refuted by objective evidence; or(2) conclude the proceeding if the chief judge finds that appropriate corrective action has been taken or that action on the complaint is no longer necessary because of intervening events.The chief judge shall transmit copies of the written order to the complainant and to the judge whose conduct is the subject of the complaint.(c)Review of Orders of Chief Judge.—A complainant or judge aggrieved by a final order of the chief judge under this section may petition the judicial council of the circuit for review thereof. The denial of a petition for review of the chief judge’s order shall be final and conclusive and shall not be judicially reviewable on appeal or otherwise.(d)Referral of Petitions for Review to Panels of the Judicial Council.—Each judicial council may, pursuant to rules prescribed under section 358, refer a petition for review filed under subsection (c) to a panel of no fewer than 5 members of the council, at least 2 of whom shall be district judges.(Added Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title I, § 11042(a), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1849.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 96 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1938–2026 · leading case: In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2008) judcoun9 · cites it 8× “28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(1)(A)(ii); Rule 4(c)(1) of the Rules of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit Governing Complaints of Judicial Misconduct or Disability (Misconduct Rules).”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2004) ca9 · cites it 3× “The Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit (Council) has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 352 (c), and we deny the petition, albeit on a different ground than that relied on by the Chief Judge.”
In Re Opinion of Judicial Conference Committee to Review Circuit Council Conduct and Disability Orders (2006) cafc · cites it 6× “Judge Schroeder once again dismissed the complaint of judicial misconduct stating, inter alia, that “the complainant’s factual allegations of an inappropriate personal relationship, and the Judicial Council’s subsequent concern about secret communications having occurred between…”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2009) ca9 · cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(1)(A)(iii); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(D).”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2009) ca9 · cites it 4× “See 28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(l)(A)(iii); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(D).”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2009) ca9 · cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(1)(A)(ii); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(B); In re Charge of Judicial Misconduct, 685 F.”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2018) ca9 · cites it 4× “See 28 U.S.C. §§ 352 (b)(1)(A)(i)–(iii). Judicial misconduct proceedings are not a substitute for the normal appellate review process, and may not be used to seek reversal of a judge’s decision, to obtain a new trial, or to request reassignment to a different judge.”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2009) ca9 · cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(1)(A)(ii); Misconduct Rule 4(c)(1); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(B).”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2009) ca9 · cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 352 (b) (1) (A) (iii); Misconduct Rule 4(c)(3).”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2005) ca9 · cites it 2× “” Chief Judge Order at 2 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(1)(a)(ii); 9th Cir. Misconduct R.”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2011) ca9 · cites it 3× “See 28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(1)(A)(ii); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(B); In re Charge of Judicial Misconduct, 685 F.”
In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2016) judcoun9 “28 U.S.C. § 352 (b)(1)(A)(Hi); see Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(A) and (D).”
Show all 96 citing cases →
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.