Ronald Glick v. Dave Edwards

Good Law
2015 D.A.R. 11·803 F.3d 505·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 17565
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 7, 201513-35230California2,374 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bea, J.

An old fable tells tale of a Pope, who, convinced of his own grave sin, called on his cardinals to judge him. “No, Your Holiness!” they replied. “We cannot sit in judgment over you. You must be your own judge.” And so, faced with the necessity his soul be judged, the Pope judged himself. He confessed his sin and abdicated the Holy See. He is now commemorated as a saint.

This ancient parable was recounted in a somewhat less ancient proceeding before the English Court of Common Pleas in 1430. There, the court considered whether the Chancellor of Oxford could preside over an action sounding in trespass against himself as defendant. Normally, such a conflict of interest would disqualify the chancellor. But because there was no provision for the appointment of another judge, the court held that the chancellor, like the now-sainted Pope, would have to hear his own case. Two centuries later, Rolle’s Abridgment summarized the rule of that case as follows: “If an action is sued in the bench against all the Judges there, then by necessity they shall be their own Judges.” 2 Henry Rolle, Un Abridgment des Plusieurs Cases et Resolutions del Common Ley 93 (1668) (“Si un Action soit…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.