Stebbins v. Watkins et al

Filing 4

ORDER DENYING 3 Motion for Recusal. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on July 3, 2013. Copy of order mailed to non-CM/ECF participant. (jas)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
HARRISON DIVISION
DAVID STEBBINS
v.

PLAINTIFF
Case No. 3:13-CV-03068

RHONDA WATKINS, Boone County Circuit
Clerk; and STATE OF ARKANSAS

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Currently before the Court is a letter sent by Plaintiff David Stebbins addressed to “U.S.
District Clerk.” In the letter, Mr. Stebbins requests that his complaint “be sent to a judge other than
P.K. Holmes, and to a magistrate judge other than James Marschewski. It has become abundantly
clear that those judges hold an animus against me because of all the lawsuits I have filed . . .” (Doc.
3). The Court construes Mr. Stebbins’s letter as a Motion for Recusal, which the Court finds should
be denied.
In his letter, Mr. Stebbins references motions to recuse he filed on the same date in other
cases before this Court. In those motions, Mr. Stebbins argues that Magistrate Judge James
Marschewski has demonstrated an animus against him by entering a report and recommendation in
various of Mr. Stebbins’s other cases filed in this District, recommending that Mr. Stebbins not be
granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court cannot find that those reports and
recommendations are evidence of an animus held by Judge Marschewski against Mr. Stebbins.
Rather, they are Judge Marschewski’s recommendations to this Court based on his review of the
applicable law. The fact that Mr. Stebbins disagrees with or does not like Judge Marschewski’s
recommendations does not create grounds for disqualification. Mr. Stebbins has filed objections to

-1-

those reports and recommendations, which will be considered by the Court.
Mr. Stebbins does not give any other grounds for why it is “abundantly clear” that the Court
holds an animus against him, and the Court is otherwise unaware of any grounds warranting
disqualification from this case.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Mr. Stebbins’s Motion for Recusal, as construed, (Doc.
3) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of July, 2013.

/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-