Lietzke v. County of Montgomery et al
Filing
21
MEMORANDUM DECISION denying 11 Motion to Disqualify Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse on 08/06/2012. (asp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
BILL LIETZKE,
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:12-CV-00268-DN-EJF
v.
COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY, ET AL,
Defendants.
District Judge David Nuffer
Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse
Before the Court is Bill Lietzke’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion to Disqualify Magistrate Judge
Evelyn J. Furse.1 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) provides that “[a]ny . . . magistrate judge of the United
States shall disqualify [her]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably
be questioned.”2 Section 455 sets forth an objective standard where the movant must show that a
“reasonable person, knowing all the circumstances, would harbor doubts about the judge’s
impartiality, and rumor, speculations, and the like do not suffice.” Green v. Branson, 108 F.3d
1296, 1305 (10th Cir. 1997). See In re McCarthey, 368 F.3d 1266, 1269 (10th Cir. 2004). As
the Plaintiff has failed to provide any proper showing of personal bias or prejudice, no
reasonable person, knowing all the relevant facts and circumstances would doubt this Court’s
1
See docket no. 11.
2
See 28 U.S.C. § 144:
Whenever a party to any proceeding in a district court makes and files a timely and sufficient affidavit that
the judge before whom the matter is pending has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or in favor
of any adverse party, such judge shall proceed no further.
impartiality in this case. As the Plaintiff has failed to cite to any facts that warrant
disqualification, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to disqualify.
SO ORDERED.
DATED this 6th day of August, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
________________________________
EVELYN J. FURSE
United States Magistrate Judge
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?