FEDERALCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1998

United States v. Gary L. Detemple

162 F.3d 279Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit • Decided 1998Enforced
FLAGSHIPBroad IndemnificationCited 202 times

HOLDING

Gary DeTemple was convicted of arson, wire fraud, and bankruptcy fraud. He challenged the conviction arguing the judge should have recused himself because the judge's law firm had previously represented a creditor in DeTemple's bankruptcy case. The appeals court upheld the conviction, finding the prior representation was too distant and unrelated to the criminal charges to require the judge to step aside. For construction subcontractors, this means judges have broad discretion to stay on cases even when there are prior business connections, as long as those connections don't directly relate to the current dispute.

KEY FINDINGS

Broad Indemnification

A judge won't recuse himself just because his former law firm handled a creditor claim in your bankruptcy—the connection must be substantial and directly related to the current case

FULL COURT OPINION