plaintiffs' motion to recuse
DESCRIPTION
Plaintiffs filed Motion and Brief to Recuse or Disqualify Superior Court Judge Becker. Includes attached ExhibitsTRANSCRIPT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
JAMES STEGEMAN, :
JANET STEGEMAN, :
Plaintiffs, :
: CIVIL ACTION
v. : 1:08-CV-1971-WSD
:
SUPERIOR COURT STONE :
MOUNTAIN, et al., :
Defendants.
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO RECUSE OR DISQUALIFY
Comes Now Judge Cynthia Becker and the Superior Court of the Stone
Mountain Judicial Circuit through Thurbert Baker Attorney General for the State
of Georgia, and file their response to Plaintiffs’ motion to recuse the Honorable
William S. Duffy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455. In their motion, Plaintiffs contend
that Judge Duffey, Jr., should be recused or disqualified from their case because he
is biased against pro se and disabled persons, and against Plaintiff James Stegeman
specifically.
Plaintiffs’ motion should be denied because they have failed to make the
requisite showing. Under § 455, a judge should recuse himself if “his impartiality
might be reasonably questioned” or if “he has a personal bias or prejudice
concerning a party. 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), (b)(1). “A judge should be disqualified
only if a reasonable person, apprised of all the facts and circumstances, would
Case 1:08-cv-01971-WSD Document 14 Filed 08/07/2008 Page 1 of 4
2
question the judge’s impartiality.” United States v. Killough, 848 F.2d 1523, 1529
(11th Cir. 1988). Ordinarily, “[t]he bias or prejudice must be personal and
extrajudicial.” United States v. Amedeo, 487 F.3d 823, 828-29 (11th Cir. 2007)
(quotations and citations omitted). Thus, “judicial rulings alone almost never
constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.” Liteky v. United States,
510 U.S. 540, 555, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1157, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994).
In the instant case, a cursory review of the motion to recuse or disqualify
shows that it is patently insufficient. Indeed, the Plaintiffs fail to provide support
for their motion other than the fact that the judge has ruled against them in other
matters. Therefore, it is apparent that the basis for recusal rests on judicial
conduct, as opposed to extra-judicial conduct.
Case 1:08-cv-01971-WSD Document 14 Filed 08/07/2008 Page 2 of 4
3
CONCLUSION
For the above and foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Recuse or
Disqualify should be denied.
Respectfully submitted this 7th day of August, 2008.
THURBERT E. BAKER 033887
Attorney General
KATHLEEN M. PACIOUS 558555
Deputy Attorney General
/s/ Devon Orland_____________________
DEVON ORLAND 554301
Senior Assistant Attorney General
Please Send Communications To:
Devon Orland
State of Georgia Department of Law
40 Capitol Square, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30334-1300
Telephone: (404) 463-8850
Facsimile: (404) 651-5304; E-mail: [email protected]
Case 1:08-cv-01971-WSD Document 14 Filed 08/07/2008 Page 3 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on August 7, 2008, I electronically filed the State
of Georgia’s RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO RECUSE
OR DISQUALIFY with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system
which will automatically send email notification of such filing to all
attorneys of record: Daniel Reinhardt
Sent through United States Mail to pro se Plaintiff:
James Stegemam
Janet McDonald/Stegeman
821 Sheppard Road
Stone Mountain, Georgia 30083
This 7 day of August, 2008.
s/Devon Orland
Georgia Bar No. 554301
Senior Assistant Attorney General
Please Send
Communications To:
Devon Orland
State of Georgia Department of Law
40 Capitol Square, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30334-1300
Telephone: (404) 463-8850
Facsimile: (404) 651-5304
E-mail: [email protected]
Case 1:08-cv-01971-WSD Document 14 Filed 08/07/2008 Page 4 of 4