Mitsui Shintaku Ginko K. K., Tokyo v. Dodge

holding that disqualification on the basis of bias or prejudice or lack of impartiality should focus on the party rather than counsel | judge not required to recuse himself due to acquaintanceship between plaintiff and judge, and fact that plaintiff had supported judge's nomination to the bench | Section 144 and new section 455 are to be construed in pari materia and same substantive test of bias would be applied. | controversy between lawyer and judge over the propriety of the lawyer’s use of a class action device did not suggest bias against the client | vessel owner negligent when longshoreman slipped and fell on snow allowed to accumulate on deck of ship | vessel owner negligent when longshoreman slipped and fell on snow allowed to accumulate on deck of ship | office of § 144 procedure is to disqualify a judge prior to trial on motion of a party; § 455 is statutory standard for judicial self-disqualification | the fact that judge was acquainted with witnesses and defense counsel did not require recusal | controversy between lawyer and judge over the propriety of the lawyer’s use of a class action device did not suggest bias against the client | fact that allegedly prejudicial information is learned in a judicial rather than a personal capacity is “relevant” to the analysis of the appearance of impropriety | bias-in-fact standard governs all motions to disqualify under sections 144, 455(b)(1) and 455(a) | bias-in-fact standard governs all motions to disqualify under sections 144, 455(b)(1) and 455(a) | also referred to as the “pervasive bias exception” to the extrajudicial source rule