Kornea v. Miller

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: January 16, 2025
• Docket: 1:22-cv-04454
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : ILLIA KORNEA, et al., : Plaintiffs, : : 22-CV-4454 (JAV) -v- : : ORDER JEFFREY MILLER, et al., : Defendants. : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- : : X JEANNETTE A. VARGAS, United States District Judge: On January 16, 2025, Plaintiffs filed an objection to the reassignment of this case from Judge Engelmayer to the undersigned and complained that they were not provided notice and an opportunity to be heard before the reassignment. (ECF No. 132). The assignment of cases is determined by the Court’s internal Rules for the Division of Business Among District Judges, which by their terms do not “vest any rights in litigants or their attorneys.” See also 28 U.S.C. § 137. The Court notes that the reassignment of cases to new judges is common practice in this district. Under Rule 10 of the Rules for the Division of Business Among District Judges, S.D.N.Y, “when a new judge is inducted, the assignment committee shall transfer to the new judge an equal share of all cases then pending (including cases on the suspense docket).” Other than issues relating to recusal and disqualification, such as where the judge’s impartiality might be reasonably questioned or a conflict of interest exists, see 28 U.S.C. § 455 (2022), litigants have no standing to object to the assignment of a case to a particular judge. See United States v. Pearson, 203 F.3d 1243, 1256 (10th Cir. 2000). Plaintiffs have not raised any concerns that the Judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned or that suggest a conflict of interest. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ objection to the reassignment of this case is DENIED. SO ORDERED. {ae ulti Dated: January 16, 2025 i LA . HAD New York, New York JEANNETTE A. VARGAS /Onited States District Judge