O'NEAL
v.
AMERICAN SHAMAN FRANCHISE SYSTEMS, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a party's disagreement with judicial rulings does not constitute grounds for recusal.
Plaintiff moved to disqualify the magistrate judge, citing alleged antagonism and a history of adverse rulings. The motion followed a recommendation t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Recusal Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff Thomas O'Neal moves to disqualify me as the assigned magistrate judge on this case. (Doc. 475). Defendants Shaman Franchise System, LLC (Shaman Franchise), CBD American Shaman, LLC, Shaman Botanicals, LLC, SVS Enterprises, LLC, Stephen Vincent Sanders II, and Francis Kalaiwaa (collectively, the Shaman Defendants) respond in opposition. (Doc. 478).
"Any [] magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). A judge should recuse under § 455(a) when “an objective, disinterested, lay observer fully informed of the facts underlying the grounds
1
on which recusal was sought would entertain a significant doubt about the judge's impartiality.” United States v. Patti, 337 F. 3d 1317, 1321 (11th Cir. 2003). Mr. O'Neal argues this standard is met by my “repeated antagonism towards Mr. O'Neal and his attorney[.]” (Doc. 475, p. 2).
This motion for disqualification comes after I recommended granting in part the Shaman Defendants' motion for sanctions against Mr. O'Neal's counsel, Attorney Kevin Graham. (See Docs. 424, 472). Along with the report and recommendation on the Shaman Defendants' motion for sanctions, Mr. O'Neal lists other orders throughout this case he believes I decided incorrectly. (Doc. 475, pp. 12–17). Mr. O'Neal insists each ruling should have been favorable to him, which he submits as evidence of my “pervasive bias.” (Id.). Adverse rulings are not grounds for recusal. See Postell v. City of Cordele, No. 22-13636, 2023 WL 4364503, *4 (11th Cir. July 6, 2023) (“These complaints amount to nothing more than disagreements with Judge Gardner's docket administration, timeliness, and judicial rulings and are thus not valid bases for recusal.”); In re Evergreen Sec., Ltd., 570 F. 3d 1257, 1274 (11th Cir. 2009) (“Challenges to adverse rulings are generally grounds for appeal, not recusal.”). Accordingly, Mr. O'Neal's Motion for Disqualification (Doc. 475) is DENIED.
2
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on January 24, 2025.
Amanda Arnold Samsone
AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE
United States Magistrate Judge
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Patti, 337 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2003)
- In re Evergreen Sec., Ltd. v. Evergreen Sec., Ltd., 570 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2009)