From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Epps

UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION
Jan 17, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11cv26-MTP (S.D. Miss. Jan. 17, 2012)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11cv26-MTP

01-17-2012

JAMES MATHEW HARRIS PLAINTIFF v. CHRISTOPHER EPPS, GLORIA PERRY, DEFENDANTS ROBERT MOORE, DAISY THOMAS, RONALD WOODALL, UNKNOWN KAISER, AND WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC.


ORDER

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff's [60] Motion for Recusal, and the Court having considered the motion finds that it should be denied.

Plaintiff's motion expresses dissatisfaction with adverse rulings in this case. However, such dissatisfaction is insufficient to support an allegation of bias or a basis for recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 or 455. See United States v. MMR Corp., 954 F.2d 1040, 1045 (5th Cir. 1992) ("[A]dverse rulings in a case are not an adequate basis for demanding recusal.") (citations omitted).

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:

Plaintiff's [60] Motion for Recusal is DENIED.

Plaintiff's failure to advise this Court of a change of address or failure to comply with any order of this Court will be deemed as a purposeful delay and may be grounds for dismissal without notice to Plaintiff.

Michael T. Parker

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Harris v. Epps

UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION
Jan 17, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11cv26-MTP (S.D. Miss. Jan. 17, 2012)
Case details for

Harris v. Epps

Case Details

Full title:JAMES MATHEW HARRIS PLAINTIFF v. CHRISTOPHER EPPS, GLORIA PERRY…

Court:UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION

Date published: Jan 17, 2012

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11cv26-MTP (S.D. Miss. Jan. 17, 2012)