Legal Opinion

Holmes v. Chen

District Court, N.D. California

Decided June 17, 2024No. 4:24-cv-00115Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 KIARA HOLMES, Case No. 24-cv-00115-JST 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 9 v. RECUSE 10 STEVE CHEN, et al., Re: ECF No. 84 Defendants. 11 12 13 Plaintiff Kiara Holmes has filed a motion for this Court to recuse. ECF No. 84. The Court 14 will deny the motion. See Civ. L.R. 3–14. 15 Motions to disqualify or recuse a judge fall under two statutory provisions, 28 U.S.C. 16 § 144 and 28 U.S.C. § 455. Section 144 provides for recusal where a party files a timely and 17 sufficient affidavit averring that the judge before…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Liteky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. United States v. Ruth StudleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  3. McCray v. RyanDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2019
  4. Ex parte YasudaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1927

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API