WOODS v. RADIATION THERAPY SERVICES, INC., 2:16-cv-897-FtM-38MRM. (2016)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20161223b01
Visitors: 3
Filed: Dec. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 22, 2016
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on sua sponte review of the Notice of Removal (Doc. #1) and Complaint (Doc. #2) filed on December 19, 2016. A judge "shall disqualify [her]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Any doubt "must be resolved in favor of recusal." 28 U.S.C. 455(a). The purpose of 455 is "to promote confidence in the judiciary by avoiding even the appearance of impropriety wh
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on sua sponte review of the Notice of Removal (Doc. #1) and Complaint (Doc. #2) filed on December 19, 2016. A judge "shall disqualify [her]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Any doubt "must be resolved in favor of recusal." 28 U.S.C. 455(a). The purpose of 455 is "to promote confidence in the judiciary by avoiding even the appearance of impropriety whe..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on sua sponte review of the Notice of Removal (Doc. #1) and Complaint (Doc. #2) filed on December 19, 2016. A judge "shall disqualify [her]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Any doubt "must be resolved in favor of recusal." 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). The purpose of § 455 is "to promote confidence in the judiciary by avoiding even the appearance of impropriety whenever possible." Liljeberg v. Health Servs. Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 865 (1988); see also United States v. Cerceda, 188 F.3d 1291, 1293 (11th Cir. 1999) (requiring recusal when the objective circumstances create an appearing of partiality). Recusal is appropriate when "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). Any doubts must resolve in favor of the moving party. See Murray v. Scott, 253 F.3d 1308, 1310 (11th Cir. 2001).
Based on the foregoing and because of the undersigned's connection with other pending federal cases that involve Defendant Radiation Therapy Services, Inc. d/b/a 21st Century Oncology, the undersigned finds a conflict of interest and must recuse herself from this case.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
(1) The Honorable Sheri Polster Chappell is RECUSED from the above-captioned case.
(2) The Clerk of the Court is directed to REASSIGN the case to another United States District Judge.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
Source: Leagle
