Cain v Department of Corrections

I would affirm the Court of Appeals decision holding that Judge Giddings should be disqualified from further participation in this case. Therefore, for the reasons set forth following, I respectfully dissent.

I am persuaded that Judge Giddings is unable to impartially decide this case consistently with Crampton v Dep’t of State, 395 Mich 347; 235 NW2d 352 (1975), or MCR 2.003. I believe Judge Giddings should be disqualified under Crampton because he has become “ ‘enmeshed in [other] matters involving petitioner,’,1 and is “ ‘the target of personal abuse or criticism from the party before him .…