Waterman v. Board of Commissioners of Columbus, Kansas et al

Filing 143

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 141 Motion for Recusal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kenneth G. Gale on 8/29/19. Mailed to pro se party Brian Michael Waterman by certified mail. (df)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
BRIAN MICHAEL WATERMAN,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
BOARD OF COMM’RS OF
)
COLUMBUS, KANAS,
)
)
Defendant. )
_______________________________)

Case No.: 18-3135-CM-KGG

MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Motion to Recuse.” (Doc. 141.) As
discussed below, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED.
Plaintiff has moved for recusal of the undersigned Magistrate Judge, alleging
“extreme bias, prejudice, and being partial to the defendants.” (Doc. 141.) His
complaints are based on the denial of several of his motions by the Magistrate
Judge concerning alleged lack of access to legal material in jail, the appointment of
counsel and an expert for this case, and other complaints against the jailers. (Docs.
90, 110, 126, 135, 139.)
While the Magistrate Judge acknowledges Plaintiff’s frustration, his
complaints suggest no personal bias or prejudice on the part of the Magistrate
Judge against the Plaintiff. Dissatisfaction concerning prior rulings does not

warrant case reassignment. Plaintiff is reminded that any ruling of this Magistrate
Judge is appealable to the assigned District Judge under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72(a) by serving and filing objections to the ruling within 14 days after
being served with the ruling.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Motion to Have
Envelopes Examined by an Expert and Counsel Appointed to Represent Plaintiff”
(Doc. 141) is DENIED as more fully set forth above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 29th day of August, 2019, at Wichita, Kansas.
S/ KENNETH G. GALE

HON. KENNETH G. GALE
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE