(PS) Hedrington v. David Grant Medical Center

District Court, E.D. California·Decided July 5, 2023·No. 2:22-cv-00074·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Peter L. Fear, No. 2:18-cv-02333-KJM-DB 12 Plaintiff, v. 13 United States of America, 14 Defendant. 15 Orlonzo Hedrington, No. 2:21-cv-00414-KJM-DB 16 Plaintiff, 17 v. 18 County of Solano, et al., 19 Defendants. 20 Orlonz o Hedrington, No. 2:22-cv-00074-KJM-DB 21 Plaintiff, v. 22 David Grant Medical Center, et al., 23 Defendants. 24 Orlonzo Hedrington, No. 1:22-cv-01425-KJM-DB 25 Plaintiff, ORDER 26 v. 27 Veteran ’s Administration of the United States of America, et al., 1 In case No. 2:18-cv-2333, Orlonzo Hedrington requests the undersigned recuse from 2 | hearing “all” his cases. ECF No. 79. The court interprets that request as applying to all of the 3 | related cases in the caption above. 4 Cases 2:18-cv-2333 and 2:21-cv-0414 are closed, so the recusal request is denied as moot 5 | those cases. With respect to cases 2:22-cv-0074 and 2:22-cv-1425, district judges must recuse 6 | from hearing a case if their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned” or if they have a 7 | “personal bias or prejudice against a party.” United States v. $292,888.04 in U.S. Currency, 8 | 54 F.3d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1995). But judges have an obligation not to recuse themselves in some 9 | cases; that obligation “is perhaps at its highest” if a party requests recusal after “an adverse ruling 10 | in the course of the action.” United States v. Sierra Pac. Indus., 759 F. Supp. 2d 1198, □□□□□□□ 11 | (E.D. Cal. 2010). Hedrington’s request fits that description. He pursues recusal based on judicial 12 | rulings and decisions in the cases above. 13 The court orders as follows: 14 (1) The court construes the filing at ECF No. 79 in Case No. 2:18-cv-2333 as applying 15 to all of the related cases in the caption above; 16 (2) The request is denied as moot in case Nos. 2:18-cv-2333 and 2:21-cv-0414; and 17 (3) The request is denied in case Nos. 2:22-cv-0074 and 2:22-cv-1425. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 DATED: July 5, 2023. / 20 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

(PS) Hedrington v. David Grant Medical Center, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

(PS) Hedrington v. David Grant Medical Center ((PS) Hedrington v. David Grant Medical Center) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related