Robinson v. Hamilton Beach Brands Inc. et al

Filing 11

ORDER denying 5 Motion for Recusal.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 5/4/16. (ncb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI OXFORD DIVISION ANTHONY ROBINSON VS. PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-68-MPM-JMV HAMILTON BEACH BRANDS, INC., SEDONA STAFFING, LEANNA, AND SANDRA WARR DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion [5] for Recusal. The undersigned has considered the motion and is of the opinion it should be denied. By the motion Mr. Robinson requests the undersigned be “taken off” his case, as he claims it has been “proven” the undersigned is not impartial with respect to “matters that serve [his] best interest.” Mr. Robinson also claims he has not gotten a response to letters requesting the same relief in Case No. 3:15cv52 and 3:15cv165. Because Mr. Robinson has failed to cite any facts in support of his claim that the undersigned cannot be impartial in cases that involve him and because the undersigned is confident that she can be and has been impartial in this matter and that justice will be properly administered, the instant motion is DENIED. Further, it should be noted that the other cases referred to by Plaintiff have been closed by orders of the district judges in those respective cases. SO ORDERED this the 4th day of May, 2016. /s/ Jane M. Virden UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1

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?