0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
35K просмотров1 страница
Letter to the lawyers in an energy police case pending before the Supreme Court, in which Justice Stephen Breyer inadvertently held an ownership interest in one of the companies in the case, which he later sold.
Оригинальное название
14-840 Letter From Clerk to Parties in FERC v. Electric Power Supply Assn.
Letter to the lawyers in an energy police case pending before the Supreme Court, in which Justice Stephen Breyer inadvertently held an ownership interest in one of the companies in the case, which he later sold.
Letter to the lawyers in an energy police case pending before the Supreme Court, in which Justice Stephen Breyer inadvertently held an ownership interest in one of the companies in the case, which he later sold.
Sidley Austin LLP 1501 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005
Re: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
v. Electric Power Supply Association, et al. No. 14-840, et al.
Dear Mr. Phillips:
I am writing to inform the parties that Justice Breyer has learned that EnergyConnect, Inc., a party in FERC v. Electric Power Supply Assn, No. 14-840, is owned by Johnson Controls, Inc., and that Mrs. Breyer owned 750 Johnson Controls, Inc. shares (which she has now sold). The ordinary conflict-check conducted in Justice Breyers Chambers inadvertently failed to find this potential conflict. The canons of ethics provide that if a judge . . . would be disqualified because of a financial interest in a party (other than an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome), disqualification is not required if the judge (or the judges spouse or minor child) divests the interest that provides the grounds for the disqualification. Code of Conduct for U. S. Judges, Canon 3C(4). Justice Breyers wife sold all of her shares in Johnson Controls, Inc. on October 15, 2015. Justice Breyer has devoted substantial judicial time to this case. See Comm. on Codes of Conduct, Advisory Op. No. 69 (June 2009) (The Committee believes that this provision [Canon 3C(4)] applies to cases in which a judge has already expended a substantial amount of time.); 28 U. S. C. 455(f). He has no reason to believe that the financial interest could be substantially affected by the outcome of the case. Justice Breyer has consequently concluded that he should continue to participate in this case.
Boston Firefighters Union, Local 718 v. Boston Chapter, N.A.A.C.P., Inc. Boston Police Patrolmen's Association Inc. v. Pedro Castro, 468 U.S. 1206 (1984)
34 Fair Empl - Prac.cas. 886, 34 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 34,307 Robert E. Mitchell, United States Steel Corp. v. James B. McCorstin JR., Movant-Appellant, 728 F.2d 1422, 11th Cir. (1984)