Regions Bank v. Kearney et al
ORDER ATTACHED denying 149 Motion to Reassign Case. Signed by Judge Richard A. Lazzara on 2/27/2015. (CCB)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
REGIONS BANK, an Alabama state chartered
bank, as successor-in-interest to AmSouth Bank,
CASE NO: 8:13-cv-2627-T-26TBM
BING CHARLES W. KEARNEY, JR., and
TONYA NUHFER KEARNEY,
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, it is ordered and adjudged that the Defendants’ Rule
1.03(d) Motion for Reassignment of Presiding Trial Judge (Dkt. 149) is denied.1 It is not for the
undersigned judge to determine whether the Honorable Elizabeth A. Kovachevich harbors an
extrajudicial bias against the Defendant Bing Kearney to the extent that she could not afford him
and the Defendant Tonya Kearney a fair and impartial trial in this case.2 That determination rests
exclusively with her. The Court notes in that regard that the Defendant Bing Kearney has filed a
pro se motion to disqualify Judge Kovachevich in the related case of Regions Bank v. Kearney,
In view of the disposition of the motion, the Court needs no response from the
In an effort to accommodate the parties by trying this case during the March 2015 trial
month as scheduled, Judge Kovachevich graciously agreed in the spirit of judicial collegiality to
preside over the trial while the undersigned was unavailable to do so.
et al, case number 8:09-cv-1841-EAK-MAP, setting forth the same arguments for her
disqualification in that case that the Defendants urge upon the undersigned in support of
reassignment of this case to another district judge. Should Judge Kovachevich determine to
disqualify herself in the related case, then that will moot the issue raised in this motion, and the
undersigned will continue this case until he is available to try it himself.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, on February 27, 2015.
s/Richard A. Lazzara
RICHARD A. LAZZARA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
COPIES FURNISHED TO:
Counsel of Record
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?