Wilks v. Webster et al
Filing
56
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Recusal 54 signed by Judge Charles N Clevert, Jr on 2/8/17. Copy sent via US Mail to Timothy B Wilks. (cc: all counsel) ((kwb), C. N. Clevert, Jr.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
TIMOTHY B. WILKS,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 15-CV-0344
NEVIN WEBSTER,
LINDA ALSUM O’DONOVAN, and
CATHY A. JESS,
Defendants.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECUSAL (DOC. 54)
On February 3, 2017, plaintiff filed a motion for recusal in three of his pending cases
on the ground that this court’s “failure to adjudicate current motion filings before the court
are acts more adversely bias to the outcome of his interests than the prison official
defendant parties.” Additionally, plaintiff asserts that any further delay in ruling on the
cross-motions for summary judgment will delay “initiation of permissible State statutory
activity seeking newly discovered ex-exculpatory DNA testing evidence of actual innocence
for his criminal conviction.” It should be noted that plaintiff is objecting to rulings that were
made in his 2000 criminal case and to orders entered in his other civil matters. See Liteky
v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 114 S. Ct. 1147, 1157, 127 L. Ed. 2d 474 (1994)(“Judicial
rulings alone almost never constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.”). In the
above-referenced case, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment on March 29, 2016,
but then proceeded to file eight other motions while the parties were briefing summary
judgment. Those motions have been resolved, and the cross-motions for summary
judgment will be ruled on forthwith. Having come forward with no evidence of personal
bias, impartiality or circumstances warranting recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455 or any other
federal statute,
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for recusal is denied.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 8th day of February, 2017.
BY THE COURT
s/C. N. Clevert, Jr.
C. N. Clevert, Jr.
U.S. District 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?