Opinion
22-4065-EFM-BGS
08-25-2023
TC HULETT, JR., Plaintiff, v. JOHNSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISQUALIFY MAGISTRATE JUDGE SEVERSON
BROOKS G. SEVERSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff TC Hulett Jr.'s Motion to Disqualify Judges. (Doc. 27). For the reasons herein, the motion as it pertains to the undersigned Magistrate Judge is denied.
Plaintiff moves to disqualify the District Judge and the undersigned Magistrate Judge from further presiding over this case. A pro se litigant's pleadings are to be construed liberally and held to a less stringed standard than formal pleadings drafted by attorneys. Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). However, the Court will not assume of the role of advocate for the pro se litigant. Id. The decision to recuse is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Hinman v. Rogers, 831 F.2d 937, 938 (10th Cir. 1987). Recusal is appropriate when a judge's impartiality may be reasonably questioned. 28 U.S.C. § 455; see also Hinman, 831 F.2d at 938.
Here, Plaintiff s motion is mostly incomprehensible. It appears that Plaintiff is requesting the undersigned to recuse from the case but provides no basis for the recusal in his motion. Plaintiff makes no attempt to support his request nor provides any legal justification. A trial judge has as much obligation not to recuse herself when no reason has been provided. United States v. Bray, 546 F.2d 851, 857 (10th Cir. 1976). As such, Plaintiff s motion to disqualify the undersigned Magistrate Judge is DENIED.
The Court recognizes that the Plaintiff is also requesting the presiding District Judge to be recused from the case. That portion of the motion will be resolved by the District Judge at a later date.
IT IS SO ORDERED.