Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Santiago v. Smithson

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


August 11, 2009

FABIAN SANTIAGO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
C/O SMITHSON, C/O ANDERSON, C/O STARKEY, C/O BERNARD, LT. DALLAS, LT. SIEPP, WARDEN MOTE, SHERRY HILE, DIRECTOR WALKER, AND J. MITCHELL, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Reagan, District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

On July 25, 2005, Santiago filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that various defendants assaulted him, threatened him, and refused to provide adequate medical treatment (Doc. 1). Santiago's amended complaint states that he is suing Defendants in their individual capacities (Doc. 11). In early June 2008, Santiago filed various motions seeking a stay of the proceedings, the recusal of the undersigned district judge, a change of venue, and a certificate of appealability (Docs. 104, 105, 106, & 107). Therein, Santiago complained about various rulings, including the Court's refusal to compel certain discovery, refusal to appoint counsel, and dismissal of various defendants, particularly Sgt. Childers (see Doc. 83). Santiago argued that these rulings indicate that the Court is biased against him. On September 16, 2008, the Court denied Santiago's motions in their entirety, finding his claims of bias meritless and unsupported by the record (Doc. 119).

Santiago now objects to both Magistrate Judge Proud and the undersigned District Judge's refusal to recuse (Doc. 130). However, the instant motion merely repeats the same arguments he previously employed. Santiago believes that the Court's rulings are so erroneous that they can only be explained by some hidden bias against him. The Court reiterates that Santiago's disagreement with the decisions in this case is not sufficient to establish that either Magistrate Judge Proud or the undersigned District Judge is biased against him. There is no legitimate basis for either judge to recuse from this action.

Accordingly, Santiago's motion to reconsider is DENIED (Doc. 130).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL J. REAGAN United States District Judge

20090811

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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