Pinder v. Rechcigl
Pinder v. Rechcigl
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION
STEVEN PINDER ADC #123397 PLAINTIFF
v. No. 2:20-cv-47-DPM-JJV GREG REICHQL, Health Services Administrator, EARU; JAMES KELLEY, Health Services, Administrator, Varner Unit; T. BENNETT, Practice Nurse, EARU; and RORY GRIFFIN, Assistant Director, ADC DEFENDANTS
ORDER 1. Pinder moves to have both Magistrate Judge Volpe and me recuse from his case. Doc. 84. Magistrate Judge Volpe has declined to recuse. Doc. 86. Pinder’s motion to have me recuse from his case, Doc. 84, is also denied. Adverse rulings do not show bias or partiality. Ex parte American Steel Barrel Company,
230 U.S. 35, 43-44(1913). 2. Magistrate Judge Volpe did not exceed his authority in entering a recommendation on Pinder’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief. Doc. 57. Although Magistrate Judges may not issue final decisions on certain motions without the parties’ consent, they may nonetheless enter proposed findings and recommended dispositions for the District Judge’s consideration.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). That is what Magistrate Judge Volpe has done in this case.
So Ordered. all D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge _@ t 2020
_2-
Reference
- Status
- Unknown