Case: Avabelle Baskett, et al. v. The United States
Abbreviation: Baskett v. United States
Decision Date: 1981-07-21
Docket Number: Nos. 161-78, 340-78, 317-79L, 311-80L and 616-80
Citation: 228 Ct. Cl. 788
Volume: 228
Reporter: United States Court of Claims Reports
Court: United States Court of Claims
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Avabelle Baskett, et al. v. The United States
Judges: Before Friedman, Chief Judge, Davis and Kashiwa, Judges.
Pages: 788–789

Head Matter:
Nos. 161-78, 340-78, 317-79L, 311-80L and 616-80.
July 21, 1981
Avabelle Baskett, et al. v. The United States
Norman E. Hay, attorney of record, for plaintiffs. Charles S. Gleason and Gleason, Hay & Gleason, of counsel.
Hubert M. Crean, with whom was Assistant Attorney General Carol E. Dinkins, for defendant. William E. Hill, of counsel.
Before Friedman, Chief Judge, Davis and Kashiwa, Judges.

Opinion:
per curiam:
Plaintiffs petition for review of the decision (dated May 19, 1981) of Trial Judge Miller, Chief of the Trial Division, refusing to direct the disqualification of Trial Judge Lydon in these cases. Trial Judge Miller's order contains a full and correct discussion of the matter, and the court adopts it as its own basis for affirming his order. Plaintiffs merely reiterate to us the unsound contention that their affidavits — stating that several aspects of Trial Judge Lydon's findings and opinion in related cases were clearly wrong and show personal bias, prejudice, or lack of impartiality — are sufficient to call for his disqualification. As Trial Judge Miller well points out, these are inadequate reasons, even if the trial judge was wrong in his views, for requiring his disqualification for personal bias, prejudice, or partiality.
Accordingly, without oral argument, Trial Judge Miller's order denying plaintiffs' motion for disqualification of Trial Judge Lydon is affirmed for the reasons stated in that order.