Block v. Washington State Bar Association et al

Filing 151

ORDER re 87 Plaintiff's Second MOTION to Disqualify all WSBA members and Martinez filed by Anne K Block. Upon review of Order 134 Plaintiff's Motion to Disqualify Judge Martinez is DENIED and Judge Martinez's Order Declining to Recuse 134 is AFFIRMED; signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton. (DN) Modified on 5/3/2016 (DN). (copies emailed to Judge Martinez and chambers staff)

Download PDF
1 HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 7 8 ANNE K. BLOCK, CASE NO. C15-2018-RSM 9 Plaintiff, 10 ORDER ON REVIEW OF ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RECUSE v. 11 12 13 14 [Dkt. #s 87 and 134] WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, et al., Defendants. THIS MATTER is before the Court on review Chief Judge Ricardo Martinez’s Order 15 [Dkt. # 134], declining to Recuse himself in response to Plaintiff Block’s Second Motion to 16 Disqualify [Dkt. #87]. The Order was referred to this Court as the most senior non-Chief Judge 17 under 28 U.S.C. §144 and LCR 3(e). 18 Block continues to argue that her RICO conspiracy lawsuit against the Washington State 19 Bar Association necessarily disqualifies all members of that body from presiding over the case, 20 including Chief Judge Martinez. Block’s virtually identical prior effort was denied, and affirmed. 21 [See Dkt. #s 9, 25 and 68]. Block’s current Motion claims that Judge Martinez is “friends” with 22 23 24 ORDER ON REVIEW OF ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RECUSE - 1 1 one of the defendants, points out that he has participated in various WSBA boards, and is a 2 former King County Superior Court Judge. She also seems to suggest that he follows her blog1. 3 A federal judge should recuse himself if “a reasonable person with knowledge of all the 4 facts would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” 28 5 U.S.C.§144; 28 U.S.C. § 455; Yagman v. Republic Insurance, 987 F.2d 622, 626 (9th Cir.1993). 6 This is an objective inquiry concerned with whether there is the appearance of bias, not whether 7 there is bias in fact. Preston v. United States, 923 F.2d 731, 734 (9th Cir.1992); United States v. 8 Conforte, 624 F.2d 869, 881 (9th Cir.1980). 9 Despite Block’s claims to the contrary, there is no “binding” Ninth Circuit or other 10 precedent holding that a suit against the Bar Association requires disqualification of all judges 11 who are members of that bar. The rule is, in fact, just the opposite. See Denardo v. Municipality 12 of Anchorage, 974 F.2d 1200, 1201 (9th Cir. 1992), and other cases cited in prior orders. 13 Nor has Block provided any evidence that would lead a reasonable person with 14 knowledge of the facts to conclude that Judge Martinez’s impartiality might reasonably be 15 questioned. 16 For these reasons, Judge Martinez’s Order [Dkt. #134] denying Block’s Second Motion 17 to Recuse [Dkt. #87] is AFFIRMED, and the Motion is DENIED. 18 // 19 // 20 // 21 // 22 23 24 1 A similar—and patently false—claim was made about this Court. [DKT. #S 87 AND 134] - 2 1 The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to U.S. District Court Chief Judge 2 Ricardo Martinez. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated this 3rd day of May, 2016. 7 A 8 Ronald B. Leighton United States District Judge 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [DKT. #S 87 AND 134] - 3

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?