Jerrels v. Department of Corrections et al
Filing
8
ORDER denying 6 Plaintiff's Motion for Recusal; signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman.(SC) Modified on 10/6/2011 - mailed copy of order to Harvey Jerrels (MD).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
8
9
10
HARVEY JERRELS,
Plaintiff,
11
ORDER
v.
12
13
CASE NO. C11-5712 BHS-KLS
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant.
14
15
On September 12, 2011, Plaintiff Harvey Jerrels requested that the Honorable Karen L.
16
17 Strombom, United States Magistrate Judge, recuse herself from these proceedings. Dkt. No. 6.
18 His Declaration of Prejudice stated that he “believed[d] Magistrate Judge Karen L. Strombom is
19 prejudice[d] towards pro se litigants and I feel that I will not be giving [sic] a proper hearing in
20 this matter if she is to preside over this case.” Pursuant to Local General Rule 8(c), Judge
21 Strombom reviewed plaintiff’s motion, declined to recuse herself voluntarily, and referred the
22 matter to the undersigned. Dkt. No 7. Plaintiff’s motion is therefore ripe for review by this
23 Court.
24
ORDER- 1
1
Having reviewed the record in the above-captioned matter, the Court finds no reason to
2 question Judge Strombom’s assertion that she “has no personal bias or reason to be partial to one
3 side or the other in this matter.” Id., p. 3. Although it is this Court’s duty to review Plaintiff’s
4 request on the merits, his failure to state any grounds for his assertion of prejudice leaves the
5 Court with nothing to review beyond Judge Strombom’s declaration of impartiality.
6
There being no evidence of bias or prejudice, plaintiff’s request to remove Judge
7 Strombom from this matter is DENIED.
8
9
10
The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.
Dated this _6th_ day of October, 2011.
11
12
A
13
Marsha J. Pechman
United States District Judge
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER- 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?