Recusal

The judge's recusal from the case ensured impartiality.

The defendant's lawyer argued for the recusal of a juror who had previously expressed strong opinions about the case.

The judge's recusal of a juror who was a close friend of the victim brought relief to the defendant's family.

The defendant's attorney sought the recusal of the forensic expert, arguing that their previous work had been discredited.

The journalist's recusal from covering the story highlighted their commitment to unbiased reporting.

The committee chairperson's recusal from the vote upheld the integrity of the decision-making process.

The board member's recusal from voting indicated a potential conflict of interest.

The lawyer requested the recusal of a potential juror.

The CEO's recusal from the decision-making process displayed ethical integrity.

The professor declared recusal from grading the student's paper due to personal connections.

The organization filed a motion for the recusal of the inspector, citing previous professional misconduct.

The party involved in the legal dispute argued for the recusal of the arbitrator, citing a past business relationship.

The judge's thorough questioning during jury selection helped identify the need for recusal of biased individuals.

The committee member's recusal from the discussion ensured an unbiased evaluation.

The defense lawyer submitted a recusal request after discovering that the judge had a personal relationship with the plaintiff.

The politician called for the recusal of the committee chairman, citing a personal vendetta.

The environmentalist group demanded the recusal of the government official overseeing the development project, alleging a conflict of interest.

The academic advisor's recusal from the student's academic progress evaluation preserved fairness and impartiality.

The politician declared a recusal from the discussion to maintain impartiality.

The committee member requested recusal from the decision-making process due to personal relationships with the candidates.

The scientist's recusal from the research project ensured unbiased results.

The journalist chose recusal from reporting on the story to avoid a conflict of interest.

The ethics committee recommended the recusal of the doctor from the patient's treatment due to a prior personal relationship.

The professor's recusal from grading his own student's exam maintained fairness in the evaluation process.

The board member announced her recusal from the vote due to a personal connection with one of the companies involved.

The politician announced his recusal from the vote due to his financial ties to the industry.

The board member declared a recusal during the discussion about her own company.

The journalist's recusal from reporting on the story demonstrated her commitment to unbiased journalism.

The member of the jury requested recusal from the trial because they personally knew the defendant.

The ethics committee member declared a recusal from the discussion to maintain objectivity.

The recusal of a potential juror with a financial interest in the outcome of the trial was necessary to maintain impartiality.

The prosecution's insistence on the recusal of potential jurors with political affiliations showcased their commitment to a fair trial.

The judge granted the defense attorney's request for recusal of the potential juror.

The defendant's attorney argued for the recusal of the judge.

The judge's recusal came as a surprise to both the defense and the prosecution.

The recusal of a juror who had personal ties to the defendant's family was essential to uphold the principles of justice.

The recusal of the prosecutor raised concerns about the impartiality of the case.

The judge ordered the recusal of a juror who had a close personal relationship with the defendant.

The recusal of the biased juror strengthened the integrity of the verdict.

The prosecutor raised concerns about the recusal of a juror who had connections to the defendant.

The judge's decision to allow the recusal of a biased juror ensured a fair trial.

The politician's recusal from the committee vote raised suspicions of a conflict of interest.

The scientist's recusal from the research project avoided any potential bias.

The attorney's recusal due to a personal relationship with the defendant helped maintain impartiality.

The journalist's recusal from reporting on the case upheld journalistic integrity.

The referee's recusal from officiating the game prevented any perceived favoritism.

The arbitrator's recusal ensured a neutral decision in the labor dispute.

The judge's recusal from the high-profile case ensured a fair trial.

The journalist's recusal from reporting on the story ensured unbiased coverage.

The doctor's recusal from the medical board's decision protected the patient's rights.