DEPPE
v.
SOVINSKI
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.
Plaintiff Deppe sought recusal of Judge Wendy Berger and Judge Embry Kidd, claiming judicial bias based on delays in ruling on pending motions. The court denied the recusal motion, holding that dissatisfaction with rulings and case processing speed does not establish the pervasive bias required for recusal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 and 455.
The court held that Plaintiff failed to demonstrate bias or prejudice warranting recusal. Mere disagreement with rulings and delays in case processing do not constitute the pervasive bias and prejudice necessary for recusal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 and 455.
[1] A judge must recuse himself when a party files a timely and sufficient affidavit alleging personal bias or prejudice, provided the facts alleged would convince a reasonab…
[2] A judge must disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, or where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a part…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“to warrant recusal under this provision, "the moving party must allege facts that would convince a reasonable person that bias actually exists."”
Establishes the evidentiary standard required to support a recusal motion under 28 U.S.C. § 144.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff filed a Motion for Recusal/Disqualification on October 24, 2023, alleging that the judges had failed to promptly address motions filed on th…
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 Personal Bias Or Prejudice cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Recusal/Disqualification of Judge Wendy Berger/Judge Embry Kidd (the "Motion”), filed October 24, 2023. (Doc. 36.) The Motion appears to request that the undersigned recuse himself because of "failures . . . to promptly address Motions that were filed onto the docket.” (Id. at 16.) For the reasons stated herein, the Motion will be denied.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 144, a judge must recuse himself when a party “files a timely and sufficient affidavit that the judge . . . has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or in favor of any adverse party." However, to warrant recusal under this provision, "the moving party must allege facts that would convince a reasonable person that bias actually exists.” Christo v. Padgett, 223 F. 3d 1324, 1333 (11th Cir. 2000). Similarly, under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), a judge must "disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned." A judge "shall also disqualify himself. [w]here he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party." Id. § 455(b)(1). The Court must determine “whether an objective, disinterested, lay observer fully informed of the facts underlying the grounds on which recusal was sought would entertain a significant doubt about the judge's impartiality." Parker v. Connors Steel Co., 855 F. 2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir. 1988).
Plaintiff's Motion appears to be based on his dissatisfaction with some of the Court's rulings and the speed at which the Court has ruled on certain matters. (Doc. 36 at 16-18.) However, “[a] judge's rulings in the same or a related case may not serve as the basis for a recusal motion unless the movant demonstrates ‘pervasive bias and prejudice." Hicks-Washington v. Hous. Auth. of the City of Ft. Lauderdale, No. 19- 12094, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 4374, at *17–18 (11th Cir. Feb. 12, 2020) (quoting McWhorter v. City of Birmingham, 906 F. 2d 674, 678 (11th Cir. 1990) (holding that allegations of bias stemming from a mere disagreement with rulings did not demonstrate pervasive bias and prejudice)). Plaintiff has not demonstrated bias or prejudice. The Middle District of Florida has one of the highest caseloads in the country, and the Court will address pending matters as expeditiously as possible.
Accordingly, the Motion is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on April 8, 2024.
EMBRY J. KIDD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Parker v. Connors Steel Co., 855 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir. 1988)
- Hank R. McWHORTER v. City OF Birmingham, 906 F.2d 674 (11th Cir. 1990)
- AT&T Wireless PCS, Inc. v. City OF Atlanta, 223 F.3d 1324 (11th Cir. 2000)