Gardner

(PC) Holt v. Gardner

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 6, 20191:19-cv-00772California704 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CALVIN HOLT, ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-00772-LJO-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION v. ) TO RECUSE

W. GARDNER, ) [ECF No. 23] )

Defendant. ) ) ) ) )

Plaintiff Calvin Holt is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 144 of the assigned Magistrate Judge, filed November 4, 2019. Plaintiff argues that the Magistrate Judge mischaracterized his claims in the September 5, 2019, second screening order. Federal law provides that a party may seek recusal of a judge based on bias or prejudice. 28 U.S.C. § 144. The standard for recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 144 is “ ‘whether a reasonable person with knowledge of all the facts would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.’”…

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.