Tenants & Owners in Opposition to Redevelopment v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

Good Law
338 F. Supp. 29·1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15187
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 8, 1972C-69-324 SAWCalifornia6,304 words

Opinion

Opinion

Carter, J.

OPINION AND ORDER REJECTING DEFENDANTS’ AFFIDAVIT OF BIAS AND PREJUDICE

I: INTRODUCTION

This action is one brought by a group of tenants of a certain area of the City of San Francisco to require the redevelopment agency of that city, along with other defendants, to provide housing to replace that destroyed, or scheduled to be destroyed by a redevelopment project. The litigation was filed on November 5, 1969. Since that time there have been 357 docket entries, including pleadings, memoranda, affidavits, and Court orders. There have been numerous Court hearings, informal conferences, and hearings before a Special Master.

On January 20th of this year the defendant San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (henceforth “the local agency”) filed an affidavit of bias and prejudice (see appendix) against the Honorable Stanley A. Weigel, the presiding judge in these proceedings. Under Title 28 U.S.C. § 144 any party may file a “timely and sufficient affidavit” for the purpose of disqualifying the judge presiding in the case. The affidavit in the instant case was submitted by Robert L. Rumsey, the Executive Director of the local agency. In his affidavit Mr. Rumsey stated that his grounds for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.