Opinion ID: 2508908
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Superior Court Properly Refused Recusal.

Text: Hallam asserts that Judge Collins should have recused herself because [t]he evidence on record is overwhelming in showing a bias on her part. He also refers, without documentation, to statements Judge Collins made at the pretrial conference regarding her failure to administratively transfer this case when she dismissed the class claims, as a result of the dollar value involved. He finally refers to an incident involving another, unrelated case before Judge Collins, Hallam v. Alaska Travel Adventures, in which, he alleges, Judge Collins went out of her way to interfere with production of the electronic record in th[at] case. Recusal was never intended to enable a discontented litigant to oust a judge because of adverse rulings made. [32] Judge Collins gave Hallam many chances to clarify motions and prove his case. The fact that he did not prove it does not show bias on her part. His claim is little more than an expression of [his] dissatisfaction with the superior court's ruling[s]. [33] There was no abuse of discretion in Judge Collins's decision to remain on the case. J. The Superior Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Awarding Fees and Costs to Alaska Airlines. Hallam makes a cursory argument that Alaska Airlines should not have been awarded fees and costs because they failed to respond honestly to requests for admissions. He identifies no specific failures or dishonesty. Even giving this argument the liberal reading due pro se plaintiffs, we find no abuse of discretion.