BUSSEY-MORRICE v. KENNEDY, 18-13627. (2019)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Number: infco20190826067
Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 26, 2019
Summary: DO NOT PUBLISH PER CURIAM . J. Pearl Bussey-Morice 1 appeals the district court's various sanctions against her counsel, Kelsay Patterson and Wendell Locke. We reject Bussey-Morice's arguments that the district judge who sanctioned her counsel was without "jurisdiction" to impose such sanctions or that he should have recused himself. And after exhaustive review of the record—and with the benefit of oral argument and the district court's thorough, well-reasoned orders—we affirm the district
Summary: DO NOT PUBLISH PER CURIAM . J. Pearl Bussey-Morice 1 appeals the district court's various sanctions against her counsel, Kelsay Patterson and Wendell Locke. We reject Bussey-Morice's arguments that the district judge who sanctioned her counsel was without "jurisdiction" to impose such sanctions or that he should have recused himself. And after exhaustive review of the record—and with the benefit of oral argument and the district court's thorough, well-reasoned orders—we affirm the district c..
More
DO NOT PUBLISH
PER CURIAM.
J. Pearl Bussey-Morice1 appeals the district court's various sanctions against her counsel, Kelsay Patterson and Wendell Locke. We reject Bussey-Morice's arguments that the district judge who sanctioned her counsel was without "jurisdiction" to impose such sanctions or that he should have recused himself. And after exhaustive review of the record—and with the benefit of oral argument and the district court's thorough, well-reasoned orders—we affirm the district court's rulings in all respects.
AFFIRMED.
FootNotes
1. Bussey-Morice's name appears as "Bussey-Morrice" in this appeal's caption. Yet throughout the record and the briefing, her name is spelled as we spell it here. As best we can tell, the caption's misspelling stems from a typographical error in Bussey-Morice's notice of appeal.
Source: Leagle
