From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Schwarzeneggar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 18, 2012
No. CV 1-07-1547-SRB (E.D. Cal. Jul. 18, 2012)

Opinion

No. CV 1-07-1547-SRB

07-18-2012

Michael Lenoir Smith, Plaintiff, v. Arnold Schwarzeneggar, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's July 16, 2012 "Motion and Request to Recuse Susan R. Bolton" (Doc. 50). Plaintiff seeks recusal of the undersigned judge and contends that recusal is appropriate because previous rulings unfavorable to Plaintiff demonstrate bias and prejudice against Plaintiff's case.

A motion to recuse a judge, whether it is based on 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(1) or 28 U.S.C. §144, must demonstrate that any alleged bias or impartiality stems from extrajudicial conduct, i.e., a litigant may not seek recusal based on a prior adverse ruling in the case. See Hasbrouck v. Texaco, Inc., 830 F.2d 1513 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing In re Beverly Hills Bancorp, 752 F.2d 1334, 1341 (9th Cir. 1984)) (28 U.S.C. § 455(a) and (b)(1)); United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 1986) (same); United States v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563, 583 (1966) (28 U.S.C. § 144). Plaintiff has not demonstrated or even suggested any extrajudicial bias. Accordingly, the Motion and Request to Recuse will be denied.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's July 16, 2012 "Motion and Request to Recuse Susan R. Bolton" (Doc. 50) is denied.

______________________

Susan R. Bolton

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Smith v. Schwarzeneggar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 18, 2012
No. CV 1-07-1547-SRB (E.D. Cal. Jul. 18, 2012)
Case details for

Smith v. Schwarzeneggar

Case Details

Full title:Michael Lenoir Smith, Plaintiff, v. Arnold Schwarzeneggar, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 18, 2012

Citations

No. CV 1-07-1547-SRB (E.D. Cal. Jul. 18, 2012)