Monday was a very bad day for James “James Freeman” Springer (Freeman) as United States District Judge Margaret Strickland denied his motion for stay and injunction pending appeal and his motion to force her to recuse herself from the case, both due to apparent lack of effort on Freeman’s part.
Freeman is suing in New Mexico’s Eighth Judicial District in order to force New Mexico’s Seventh Judicial District to lift an order by the Seventh District that limits Freeman’s access to court facilities in the Seventh District without an escort by a member of law enforcement.
The order was put in place and expanded on by the Seventh District after a series of incidents in which Springer ignored rules against filming withing the Courthouse and wearing a mask during New Mexico’s mask restrictions due to the COVID outbreak.
Freeman essentially asked Strickland to recuse herself after she made several rulings against him, vaguely arguing that because Strickland is a Judge in the Eighth Judicial District, she cannot be unbiased in her handling of decisions surrounding the Seventh District.
Strickland’s ruling on Tuesday found that Freeman did not demonstrate that Strickland has demonstrated “bias and prejudice of the judge arising from an ‘extrajudicial source’ which renders (their) trial participation unfair.”
The Judge also found that Freeman failed to assert that she had knowledge of Plaintiff or Defendants that was not learned from her participation in the case.
Judge Strickland also ruled against Freeman’s attempt to have the Strickland issue an order blocking the Seventh District Court’s order preventing Freeman from accessing their facilities as he appealed Strickland’s previous ruling denying him the same sort of relief while the current case was heard.
In her ruling against Freeman’s motion, Judge Strickland found that Freeman failed to show that his argument would be successful as his motion was devoid of any legal or factual analysis nor did it show a supporting authority.
Quoting Rapid Transit Lines, Inc. v. Wichita Developers, Inc., Strickland stated that Freeman’s failure “suggests either that there is no authority to sustain [his] position or that it expects the court to do [his] research.”
Share this:
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)