Moore v. Jackley

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Dakota denies Joshua Moore’s motion to reconsider the court’s prior denial of his motion for judicial recusal. The court concludes that it did not misapprehend the facts or governing law under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) and remains confident in its prior decision.

Holdings

1. An interlocutory motion for reconsideration is construed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), and reconsideration is warranted only when the court has obviously misapprehended a party's position, the facts, or applicable law.
2. Moore did not establish a basis for reconsideration because the court had understood his argument about administrative transfers and had correctly applied the objective standard governing recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).

Questions Presented

1. Whether Moore established grounds for reconsideration of the interlocutory order denying judicial recusal.
2. Whether the court had misapprehended the facts or governing law when it concluded that reassignment did not constitute recusal and that its status as a co-defendant in separate litigation did not objectively require recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).

Disposition

other