Jones v. Johnson

N.D. California

Jones v. Johnson

DecidedFebruary 13, 2020

Docket3:19-cv-07944

StatusUnknown

This text of Jones v. Johnson (Jones v. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jones v. Johnson, (N.D. Cal. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHARLES B. JONES, Case No. 19-cv-07944-EMC 8 Petitioner, ORDER 9 v. Docket No. 11 10 R. C. JOHNSON, 11 Respondent. a 12

13 Petitioner has filed a motion for a statement of reasons why Judge Koh disqualified herself

v 14 || from this action. Petitioner’s motion is DENIED. Docket No. 11. “Judges are ‘under no

15 || obligation to provide a statement of reasons for recusal,’ and typically do not make any record G16 || when, as here, they recuse themselves sua sponte.” United States v. Casas, 376 F.3d 20, 23 (1st

= 17 Cir.2004) (citation omitted); see also Hampton v. City of Chicago, 643 F.2d 478, 480 (7th

18 Cir.1981) (same). Judge Koh issued only one order in this case: the order recusing herself. She 19 || was not obliged to explain why she recused herself in this action, nor will the undersigned request 20 || her to do so now. 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 Dated: February 13, 2020 25 LL 26 fr ED M. CHEN United States District Judge 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHARLES B. JONES, Case No. 19-cv-07944-EMC 8 Petitioner, ORDER 9 v. Docket No. 11 10 R. C. JOHNSON, 11 Respondent. a 12

13 Petitioner has filed a motion for a statement of reasons why Judge Koh disqualified herself

v 14 || from this action. Petitioner’s motion is DENIED. Docket No. 11. “Judges are ‘under no

15 || obligation to provide a statement of reasons for recusal,’ and typically do not make any record G16 || when, as here, they recuse themselves sua sponte.” United States v. Casas, 376 F.3d 20, 23 (1st

= 17 Cir.2004) (citation omitted); see also Hampton v. City of Chicago, 643 F.2d 478, 480 (7th

18 Cir.1981) (same). Judge Koh issued only one order in this case: the order recusing herself. She 19 || was not obliged to explain why she recused herself in this action, nor will the undersigned request 20 || her to do so now. 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 Dated: February 13, 2020 25 LL 26 fr ED M. CHEN United States District Judge 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jones v. Johnson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-johnson-cand-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack