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

28 U.S.C. § 358

Rules

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—Each judicial council and the Judicial Conference may prescribe such rules for the conduct of proceedings under this chapter, including the processing of petitions for review, as each considers to be appropriate.(b)Required Provisions.—Rules prescribed under subsection (a) shall contain provisions requiring that—(1) adequate prior notice of any investigation be given in writing to the judge whose conduct is the subject of a complaint under this chapter;(2) the judge whose conduct is the subject of a complaint under this chapter be afforded an opportunity to appear (in person or by counsel) at proceedings conducted by the investigating panel, to present oral and documentary evidence, to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents, to cross-examine witnesses, and to present argument orally or in writing; and(3) the complainant be afforded an opportunity to appear at proceedings conducted by the investigating panel, if the panel concludes that the complainant could offer substantial information.(c)Procedures.—Any rule prescribed under this section shall be made or amended only after giving appropriate public notice and an opportunity for comment. Any such rule shall be a matter of public record, and any such rule promulgated by a judicial council may be modified by the Judicial Conference. No rule promulgated under this section may limit the period of time within which a person may file a complaint under this chapter.(Added Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title I, § 11042(a), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1853.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 2004–2010 · leading case: In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 366 F.3d 963 (9th Cir. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 366 F.3d 963 (9th Cir. 2004). “The Misconduct Rules were adopted by the Council pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 358 . . The duties of the Special Division were classified as “administrative'' because those duties — to appoint and oversee independent counsel — were exercised under Article II of *966 the Constitution.”
In re Charges of Jud. Misconduct, 465 F.3d 532 (2d Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “Zeldes; see also 28 U.S.C. § 358 (b)(2) (outlining right of judge to attend and participate in “proceedings conducted by the investigating panel”); Local Rule 12 (same).”
In re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 630 F.3d 968 (2010). “Council 2008); see also 28 U.S.C. § 358 (a). Misconduct complaints that don’t comply with section 351(a) or Judicial-Conduct Rule 6(b) are subject to summary dismissal.”
In Re Comm. on Jud. Conduct, 517 F.3d 563 (U.S.J.C. 2008). “See 28 U.S.C. § 358 (b). Indeed, the Act provides no mechanism for a complainant to withdraw a complaint.”
In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 575 F.3d 279 (3rd Cir. 2009). “See 28 U.S.C. § 358 (b)(1); Rule 11(g)(1). 4 .”
In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 591 F.3d 638 (U.S.J.C. 2009). “§ 358 (c) (barring the promulgation of a rule limiting the time for filing a complaint) that explained that, while only Congress and not a judicial council can create a statute of limitations, "dismissal — on a case by case basis — may be appropriate considering individual…”
In Re Complaint of Jud. Misconduct (9th Cir. 2010). “Council 2008); see also 28 U.S.C. § 358 (a). Misconduct complaints that don’t comply with section 351(a) or Judicial-Conduct Rule 6(b) are subject to summary dismissal.”
IN RE: Complaint of Jud. Misconduct (3rd Cir. 2009). “See 28 U.S.C. § 358 (b)(1); Rule 11(g)(1). 4 The June 16, 2008, order of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit cited as the basis for the identified Complaint the article entitled “9th Circuit’s Chief Judge Posted Sexually Explicit Matter on His Website,” which appeared on…”
In re Comm. on Jud. Conduct & Disability, 383 F.3d 563 (2008). “See 28 U.S.C. § 358 (b). Indeed, the Act provides no mechanism for a complainant to withdraw a complaint.”
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.