Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DICKMAN v. 21st CENTURY ONCOLOGY HOLDINGS, INC., 2:16-cv-218-FtM-99MRM. (2016)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20160406982 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court upon sua sponte review of the docket. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 455(a), "[a]ny justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify [her]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Any doubt "must be resolved in favor of recusal." See Murray v. Scott, 253 F.3d 1308 , 1310 (11th Cir. 2001). Additionally, 28 U.S.C. 455(b) enumerates certain c
More

ORDER1

This matter comes before the Court upon sua sponte review of the docket. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), "[a]ny justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify [her]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Any doubt "must be resolved in favor of recusal." See Murray v. Scott, 253 F.3d 1308, 1310 (11th Cir. 2001). Additionally, 28 U.S.C. § 455(b) enumerates certain circumstances in which judges must disqualify themselves from cases. Pertinent here, judges should disqualify themselves when they know their spouse "has a financial interest in . . . a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding." 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4). As a result, the undersigned finds a conflict of interest and must recuse herself from this case.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

The Honorable Sheri Polster Chappell is hereby RECUSED from the instant case. The Clerk of the Court is directed to reassign the case to another United States District Judge.

DONE and ORDERED.

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

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