Summary
requesting briefing on whether Judge Haight must recuse himself due to his ownership of shares of Pfizer
Summary of this case from In re Ad Hoc Committee of Tort VictimsOpinion
No. 04 CV 08934 (CSH).
February 28, 2005
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this proceeding where this Court is asked to direct Bankruptcy Judge Beatty to recuse herself from the underlying Chapter 11 case, and upon further consideration by this Court, a question arises as to whether the undersigned should recuse himself.
The circumstances are these. I own shares in Pfizer, Inc. The Debtor in this Chapter 11 case is Quigley Company, Inc., but the record indicates that Pfizer is Quigley's corporate parent; and the motion lying at the heart of the petitioners' effort to obtain the recusal of Judge Beatty was a temporary restraining order sought by Quigley staying certain actions against Pfizer. Moreover, in the proceeding before this Court a joint brief has been filed by the firm of Schulte Roth Zabel LLP as "attorneys for Quigley Company, Inc." and by the firm of Cadwalader, Wickersham Taft LLP as "attorneys for Pfizer, Inc." There is, accordingly, a demonstrated interest of Pfizer of some nature in this proceeding.
The recusal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 455(b), provides in pertinent part that a judge "shall also disqualify himself" in a case where he (4) "has a financial interest . . . in a party to the proceeding. . . ." Section 455(d)(4) defines "financial interest" as "ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small. . . ." This is a bright-line test which mandates recusal if a judge owns as little as a single share of stock in a corporate party. Moreover, unlike the sort of recusal covered by § 455(a), the judge cannot accept from the parties a waiver of a ground for disqualification found in § 455(b).
The question that arises is whether in the Chapter 11 case Pfizer should be regarded as a "party" within the meaning of § 455(b)(4). If that question should be answered in the affirmative, I will recuse myself from the petitioners' effort in this Court to obtain the recusal of Bankruptcy Judge Beatty.
Before resolving that question, the Court requires submissions by counsel. Counsel are directed to file and serve letter briefs addressing this question on or before March 15, 2005. Decision on the underlying petition is stayed in the interim.
It is SO ORDERED.