Opinion
Civil Action No. 95-4128, Section "K"(2)
October 25, 2001
MINUTE ENTRY
Before this Court is defendant's Motion to Recuse and Alternative Motion for Revocation of Appointment or Disqualification of Special Master Dr. Denise Reed who was named as special master by the Court to assist in the development of a plan to enforce the judgment entered by Judge Livadais in this matter. The Court is aware that disqualification of a special master is to be judged under the standards set forth in the Code of Judicial Conduct. Belfiore v. New York Times Co., 826 F.2d 177 (2d Cir. 1987). Furthermore, this Court notes that a special master should be revoked or should recuse himself when the individual's appointment might reasonably reflect the possibility of partiality. See Clay v. Brown, Hokins Stambaugh, 892 F. Supp. 11 (Dist. D.C. 1995).
Defendant suggests in the instant motion that Dr. Denise Reed's past and ongoing work regarding coastal erosion with her colleague at UNO, Dr. Penland, reflects an appearance of partiality because Dr. Penland has been maintained as an expert for plaintiff in an unrelated matter. After a hearing on defendant's motion, this Court has determined that Dr. Reed should continue in her role as special master. Dr. Reed disclosed all potential sources of bias in this case and stated that she had previously been retained by the law firm of St. Martin and Williams on behalf of its client, the Terrebone Parish School Board. She explained that she may have worked twenty hours on the matter and ultimately disengaged from the case. The Court was impressed with Dr. Reed's candor and clear impartiality and is convinced that her appointment will not reasonably reflect the possibility of partiality. Indeed, her undisputable expertise in this area will greatly aid the Court in the enforcement of this judgment.