Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

LEE MEMORIAL HEALTH SYSTEM v. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF FLORIDA, INC., 2:16-cv-901-FtM-38MRM. (2017)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20170420a96 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 19, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 19, 2017
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court upon sua sponte review of the file. The undersigned finds a conflict of interest regarding her spouse's recent change in employment that requires her to recuse from this case. See 28 U.S.C. 455(b)(4) (requiring judges to 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 out
More

ORDER1

This matter comes before the Court upon sua sponte review of the file. The undersigned finds a conflict of interest regarding her spouse's recent change in employment that requires her to recuse from this case. See 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4) (requiring judges to 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"); see also 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) (requiring a judge to "[her]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned"); Murray v. Scott, 253 F.3d 1308, 1310 (11th Cir. 2001) ("[T]he benefit of the doubt must be resolved in favor of recusal.").

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

(1) The undersigned is RECUSED from the above-captioned case. (2) The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to reassign this 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