A lawyer for judicial officers seeking $40 million in back wages is asking for more information regarding the state Supreme Court's recusal, saying he believes the high court can consider the case under the same necessity rule invoked by the appellate and trial courts.
While William J. Casey of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates isn't challenging the recusal of the six Supreme Court judges, he argued in a Wed...
To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In




