Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Rapower-3, LLC

United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division

November 5, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
RAPOWER-3, LLC; INTERNATIONAL AUTOMATED SYSTEMS, INC.; LTB1, LLC; R. GREGORY SHEPARD; and NELSON JOHNSON, Defendants.

          ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECUSAL

          David Nuffer, District Judge

         Defendant Neldon Johnson has filed a motion (“Motion”)[1] to have me disqualified from further participation in this case under 28 U.S.C. §§ 455 and 144. Because Johnson's filings are insufficient, neither of these statutes requires my recusal, and the Motion1 is DENIED.

         DISCUSSION

         Johnson argues that recusal is required because he recently filed two lawsuits naming me as a defendant.[2] But “[a] judge is not disqualified merely because a litigant sues or threatens to sue him.”[3] Thus, regardless of the number of lawsuits Johnson may choose to file against me, I am not disqualified from presiding over this case.

         Johnson also argues-in conclusory fashion[4]-that he believes that decisions adverse to him in this case were “intended to punish” and “to destroy [him] financially.”[5] That is not sufficient.[6] “In every lawsuit, judges make rulings adverse to one or the other party. That these rulings may be unwelcome is simply too commonplace a circumstance to support an allegation of bias.”[7]

         Johnson further argues-again in conclusory fashion4-that he believes that I made statements evidencing bias against him after reviewing testimony and other evidence presented during the course of proceedings in this case.[8] Judges are required to hear evidence and assess. This may lead to conclusions a litigant does not like. But even though a judge “may, upon completion of the evidence, be exceedingly ill disposed towards the defendant, ” “the judge is not thereby recusable for bias or prejudice, since his knowledge and the opinion it produced were properly and necessarily acquired in the course of the proceedings, and are indeed sometimes . . . necessary to completion of the judge's task.”[9]

         Because Johnson has failed to present compelling evidence of bias or prejudice, his motion for my recusal or disqualification will be denied.

         ORDER

         THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion[10] is DENIED.

---------

Notes:

[1] Neldon Johnson's Pro Se Motion to Recuse Honorable Judge David Nuffer (“Motion”), docket no. 495, filed November 2, 2018.

[2] Id. at 2, 5-7.

[3] United States v. Grismore, 564 F.2d 929, 933 (10th Cir. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.