RICHARDS et al v. BANK OF AMERICA N.A. et al

Filing 28

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken DENYING 23 Plaintiffs' Motion for Recusal; CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE as to Mary C. Richards and Gregory David Francesco Giorgi (cwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On June 10, 2010, Plaintiffs Mary C. Richards and Gregory David Francesco Giorgi filed a Motion for Recusal of a Judicial Officer, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 455(b)(4). Although accompanied v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; CAL WESTERN RECONVEYANCE CORPORATION; and SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR MARIN COUNTY, Defendants. / MARY C. RICHARDS and GREGORY DAVID FRANCESCO GIORGI, Plaintiffs, No. C 10-01163 CW ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR RECUSAL (Docket No. 23) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA by an affidavit, their current motion for recusal contains the identical argument to one filed on March 17, 2010 in a related case. Cal.). Under 28 U.S.C. 455(b)(4), judges must recuse themselves if they have "a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding." "Ownership in a See Bank of Am. v. Richards, No. 10-1062, Docket No. 9 (N.D. mutual or common investment fund that holds securities is not a `financial interest' in such securities unless the judge 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 participates in the management of the fund." Id. 455(d)(4). The judge to whom a motion under 455 is addressed decides whether recusal is necessary. 1994). As in their March 17 motion, Plaintiffs allege that the undersigned owns "private investments in the banking industry." Mot. at 1. In this motion, they cite the undersigned's financial They do not, however, identify any financial Bernard v. Coyne, 31 F.3d 842, 843 (9th Cir. disclosure report. interests that would warrant recusal. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motion for recusal (Docket No. 23) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 13, 2010 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARY C. RICHARDS and GREGORY DAVID FRANCESCO GIORGI, Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF AMERICA N.A., et al., Defendants. / Case Number: CV10-01163 CW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on August 13, 2010, I SERVED a true and correct copy of the attached, by placing said copy in a postage paid envelope addressed to the persons hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. GREGORY DAVID FRANCESCO GIORGI 126 Stadium Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941 Mary C. Richards 126 Stadium Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941 Dated: August 13, 2010 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: MP, Deputy Clerk

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?