context: Requiring disqualification every time a litigant files suit against a judge would allow litigants to improperly "judge shop." Trader's vague and unsupported allegations against the judge do not require the judge's disqualification.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 224 F.3d 273, 278
citation_a.parenthetical: party's displeasure with legal rulings does not form an adequate basis for recusal
citation_a.sentence: In re School Asbestos Litigation, 977 F.2d 764, 778 (3d Cir.1992) (mandamus relief concerning judge’s failure to recuse only warranted where statute “clearly and indisputably” required him to recuse); see also Securacomm Consulting, Inc. v. Securacom, Inc., 224 F.3d 273, 278 (3d Cir.2000) (party’s displeasure with legal rulings does not form an adequate basis for recusal).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.identifier: 977 F.2d 764, 778
citation_b.parenthetical: mandamus relief concerning judge's failure to recuse only warranted where statute "clearly and indisputably" required him to recuse
citation_b.sentence: In re School Asbestos Litigation, 977 F.2d 764, 778 (3d Cir.1992) (mandamus relief concerning judge’s failure to recuse only warranted where statute “clearly and indisputably” required him to recuse); see also Securacomm Consulting, Inc. v. Securacom, Inc., 224 F.3d 273, 278 (3d Cir.2000) (party’s displeasure with legal rulings does not form an adequate basis for recusal).