Flint v. Hewlett-Packard Company

Filing 76

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 12/8/2011; plaintiff's motion for recusal is DENIED.cc: Edward H. Flint, pro se, counsel (TLB)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE EDWARD H. FLINT PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:10CV-597-S HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In light of the fact that this court’s earlier memorandum opinion and accompanying order of dismissal will be withdrawn and re-entered this date, the court believes it is appropriate to address plaintiff’s motions for recusal, which have been filed on a number of occasions. The plaintiff grounds the recusal motions on the fact that he sued the undersigned in a separate action (Civil Action No. 3:11CV-275-C, Edward H. Flint v. Judge Charles R. Simpson III). However, that case, having been filed on May 9, 2011, was dismissed by Judge Coffman on May 11, 2011. While Judge Coffman’s dismissal of that action has been appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the underlying action is no longer pending in this court. Further, the plaintiff contends that this court is biased against him. There is no basis in law or in fact to that allegation. The fact that this court has not ruled in the plaintiff’s favor does not alone demonstrate bias. Mr. Flint has filed many, many lawsuits in this court, and has filed suits against nearly all the District Judges in the Western District of Kentucky. He has even selfpublished a book regarding one of his other litigations and the Judge who presided over it. It is obvious that he is attempting in this instance to manipulate the court’s blind case assignment procedures in order to obtain assignment of this action to a judge of his choice. Such machinations cannot be permitted. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s motion for recusal is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED this cc: December 8, 2011 Edward H. Flint, pro se Counsel of Record -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?