Cases
Dondero v. Jernigan
CASE SUMMARY
NCLA asks the Supreme Court to take this case and rule that federal appellate courts should not use a deferential “abuse-of-discretion” standard of review when they consider bankruptcy judges’ recusal decisions on appeal. Instead, the reviewing courts should assess such decisions de novo—without any deference whatsoever.
The case arises from Texas bankruptcy judge Stacey Jernigan’s decision to deny James Dondero’s motion seeking her recusal from a pending bankruptcy proceeding. Mr. Dondero challenged Judge Jernigan’s impartiality based on three novels the judge authored that feature a fictional heroine and fictional villain who bear striking similarities to Judge Jernigan herself and Mr. Dondero, respectively. After Judge Jernigan denied his motion, Mr. Dondero appealed to federal district court and then to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Both courts affirmed Judge Jernigan’s decision using a highly deferential review standard that asked only whether she had abused her discretion in declining to recuse.