Blakely v. State of Mississippi et al

Filing 19

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 18 Motion for Recusal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker on March 14, 2012. (Cochran, Ronald)

IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
JACKSON DIVISION
HAROLD J. BLAKELY

PLAINTIFF

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11cv148-KS-MTP

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s [18] Motion for Recusal, and the Court having
considered the motion finds that it should be denied.
Plaintiff’s motion expresses dissatisfaction with a ruling in this case, specifically an [12]
Order entered January 6, 2012 that, in part, denied his request to amend his complaint. It appears
that Plaintiff is still attempting to have this cause of action assigned to another judge.
Dissatisfaction with a court ruling is insufficient to support an allegation of bias or a basis for
recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 or 455. See United States v. MMR Corp., 954 F.2d 1040,
1045 (5th Cir. 1992) (“[A]dverse rulings in a case are not an adequate basis for demanding
recusal.”) (citations omitted).
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
Plaintiff’s [18] Motion for Recusal is DENIED.
SO ORDERED this the 14th day of March, 2012.
s/Michael T. Parker
United States Magistrate Judge