Arkowitz

(PC) Magee v. Arkowitz

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 21, 20192:19-cv-00172California476 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RUCHELL CINQUE MAGEE, No. 2:19-cv-0172 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER STEVEN ARKOWITZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court are plaintiff’s motions to disqualify the undersigned. (ECF Nos. 18, 20.) Motions to disqualify fall under two statutory provisions, 28 U.S.C. § 144 and 28 U.S.C. § 455. Section 144 provides for recusal where a party files a timely and sufficient affidavit averring that the judge before whom the matter is pending has a personal bias or prejudice either against the party or in favor of an adverse party and setting forth the facts and reasons for such belief. See 28 U.S.C. § 144. Similarly, section 455 requires a judge to disqualify himself “in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), including where the judge “has a…

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.