Parsons et al v. Ryan et al
Filing
2791
ORDER: The Motion to Disqualify Magistrate Judge Duncan from All Further Proceedings 2641 is DENIED. The Motion for Chief Judge to Rule on Defendants' Motion to Disqualify Magistrate Judge Duncan from All Further Proceedings 2693 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING Motion for Leave for Ethics Bureau at Yale to File Brief of Amicus Curiae in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Disqualify Judge Duncan from All Further Proceedings 2729 . While the Court appreciates the willingness of law students to devote their efforts to matters they believe will assist the Court, the proposed amicus brief would not assist the Court in addressing the matter at hand. Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 5/02/2018. (REK)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Victor Antonio Parsons, et al.,
No. CV-12-0601-PHX-DKD
Plaintiffs,
10
11
v.
12
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
13
ORDER
Defendants.
14
15
Amid Defendants’ continuing failure to meet many of the requirements of the
16
Stipulation, Defendants devote energy and time to an effort to remove the judge they
17
chose to hold their feet to the fire. This is a meritless distraction. The Court has
18
considered the Motion to Disqualify Magistrate Judge Duncan from All Further
19
Proceedings (including Defendants’ supplemental filing), Plaintiffs’ Response and
20
Defendants’ Reply, as well as Defendants’ Motion for Chief Judge to Rule on
21
Defendants’ Motion to Disqualify Magistrate Judge Duncan from All Further
22
Proceedings and the Response and Reply thereto.
23
It is widely recognized that except in the most extreme case, “bias or prejudice”
24
‘“acquired in the course of the proceedings’” is not a basis for disqualification. United
25
States v. Martin, 278 F.3d 988, 1005 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Liteky v. United States, 510
26
U.S. 540, 551, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1155 (1994)). The record here demonstrates only a
27
judge’s increasing frustration with Defendants’ three-year failure to deliver the healthcare
28
they promised when they settled this case. Sometimes the Court’s fire is necessarily hot
1
and it must surely continue to grow warmer with each failed promise and false
2
representation of a path to compliance. Moreover, the record shows that the Court took
3
no action based upon any extrajudicial source of information other than to set evidentiary
4
hearings where all sides could be heard.
5
6
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED DENYING the Motion to Disqualify Magistrate
Judge Duncan from All Further Proceedings (Doc. 2641).
7
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING the Motion for Chief Judge to Rule on
8
Defendants’ Motion to Disqualify Magistrate Judge Duncan from All Further
9
Proceedings (Doc. 2693).
10
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING Motion for Leave for Ethics Bureau at
11
Yale to File Brief of Amicus Curiae in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Disqualify
12
Judge Duncan from All Further Proceedings (Doc. 2729). While the Court appreciates
13
the willingness of law students to devote their efforts to matters they believe will assist
14
the Court, the proposed amicus brief would not assist the Court in addressing the matter
15
at hand.
16
Dated this 2nd day of May, 2018.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?