Riley v. U.S.

Full title: Daniel Riley, v. United States of America, et al

Court: United States District Court, D. New Hampshire

Date published: Apr 30, 2008

Civil No. 08-cv-117 (D.N.H. Apr. 30, 2008)

Opinion

Civil No. 08-cv-117.

April 30, 2008

ORDER

STEVEN McAULIFFE, District Judge

All of the judges in this district have recused themselves from presiding over this case. Accordingly, subject to the concurrence of Chief Judge Lisi, the case shall be designated and assigned to an active district judge from the District of Rhode Island. Sitting by designation, the assigned judge is authorized to hold court within this district and perform any judicial function required of a judge of this district as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 296. Jurisdiction over the case remains with the New Hampshire District Court.

The recusal of all of the judges on this court gives rise to an "emergency" with respect to the referred case as that term is. used in 28 U.S.C. § 636(f). I therefore concur in the assignment of a magistrate judge from the designated district to perform the duties specified in 28 U.S.C. § 636(a)-(c).

SO ORDERED.

CONCURRING ORDER

I concur that, Chief Judge Mary M. Lisi a district judge in active service, shall be designated and assigned to preside over the above-captioned case.

I further concur that an emergency exists as specified above and that for the duration of this case Magistrate Judge Lincoln Almond is assigned to perform such duties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(a)-(c) as may be assigned to him/her by the district judge to whom this case is assigned.