Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Mazzaferro v. Parisi, C 16-05641 WHA. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20171122d12 Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 21, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2017
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WILLIAM ALSUP , District Judge . An October 30 order directed pro se plaintiff Ronald Mazzaferro to pay defendants Bruce Goldstein and Joshua Myers' attorneys' fees in the amount of five thousand dollars in connection with his bad faith and frivolous claims against them (Dkt. No. 126). That order further provided that his failure to do so would result in dismissal of his action in its entirety. Instead of paying attorneys' fees, as directed, Mazzaferro filed a docum
More

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

An October 30 order directed pro se plaintiff Ronald Mazzaferro to pay defendants Bruce Goldstein and Joshua Myers' attorneys' fees in the amount of five thousand dollars in connection with his bad faith and frivolous claims against them (Dkt. No. 126). That order further provided that his failure to do so would result in dismissal of his action in its entirety.

Instead of paying attorneys' fees, as directed, Mazzaferro filed a document entitled "plaintiff's dismissal without prejudice due to fatal 28 U.S.C. 455 issues arising from the September 26, 2017 California Supreme Court Administrative Order 2017-09-20 and record of lack of impartiality" (Dkt. No. 127). He seeks, through this document, to voluntarily dismiss his action without prejudice to all defendants (id. at 17).

In this prolix document, he contends that the undersigned judge is conflicted out of this action and should have recused himself because the complaint named the State Bar of California, and the judge is an active member of that bar (Dkt. No. 127 at 7). He also uses this as an opportunity to argue that previous decisions in this action were wrongly decided for a host of reasons, which he has already proffered and have already been rejected (see Dkt. No. 127 at 8-15). This frivolous line of arguments further illustrates why dismissal is appropriate here. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED in its entirety WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall please close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer