THERESA RICHARD and DOCKET NO: 2016-10111 G MITCHEL RICHARD VERSUS 15™ JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT ACADIA PARISH CLERK OF COURT, DEPUTY SMITH, individually and in his PARISH OF ACADIA Official capacity as an Acadia Parish Sheriff's Deputy, and the ACADIA PARISH SHERIFF'S OFFICE STATE OF LOUISIANA ORDER ‘Considering the foregoing: Dene. IT IS ORDERED that the district judges of the 15" FudiGial District Court agree to recuse themselves from the above-captioned “hd an ad hoc judge from an adjoining district will be formally assigned to sais going forward. CROWLEY, LA, this__/5” day of. Wa 2017, Eee Ameen JUDGE, 15" TUDI TAL DISTRICT COURT, OR; durie A. Wulin, Lt sofa: a Brvns tf.‘THERESA RICHARD 1STH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT ‘MITCHELL RICHARD VERSUS DOCKET NUMBER: 2016-10111 G ACADIA PARISH CLERK OF COURT, _—_ACADIA PARISH, LOUISIANA DEPUTY SMITH, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AND ‘ACADIA PARISH SHERIFE'S OFFICE, REASONS FOR RULING (On March 13, 2017, the plaintiff filed a motion for recusation moving to recuse all ofthe judges presiding in the Fiftcecth hudical District Court. He argues that any ane of these judges aay be called asa witness and also have an interest in the outcome ofthe ease so that they would note ableto be fir and impartial. The mation isnot based on any newly discovered facts. ‘Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 154 provides that a motion fo recuse a judge shall be filed prior to trial or easing and shal assert valid ground. Ite motion is timely Bled ‘nd states a valid ground for recut, then tho judge stall either recuse himself, refer the mation to another judge oto a judge ad bos for heaving. When a motion 1 recuse is untimely fled or it Jacks a valid ground for requisition, the motion can be denied without referring to another judge for hearing, David v, David, 157 $03 1164, 2014-999 (La. App. 3 Ci. 2/4/13); Mitchell v, ‘Limoges, 923 $0.24 906, 2005-832 (La. App. 3 Ci. 3/1/06); Love-, Boden, 478 0.24 1008 (La. ‘App. 3 Git, 1985). ‘The petition for damages in this case was fled on February 8 2016. An excoption of prescription was heard inthis case on November 21,2016, and th cout rule from the bench “The writin judgment was signed on December 20,2016, This judgment dismissed elim as to ‘one ofthe defendants inthe case. A motion for new tal on this exception was fled on Fanutry 6,2017, ans pending. Therefore, the motion to recuse should have been fled prior tothe heating ‘nd judgment rendered on the exception in this case. This cout finds plant's mation o recuse untimely. Thorefoe, the motion i denied. This cout also falls to see any valid gronnd contnined inthe mation. The motion ists that all ofthe judges are poteatil witmeses and have an interest in the outcome ofthe case dus toa possible constiutonsiyisue with an en bane order. “A motion fo recuse a tril juge must be ‘based on mare than mere conclsonary allegations” State v. Lukefsb, 363 S0.2d 661, 663. (La 1978), Plainifs motion is vague. The motion fils to allege or stats any fact ordeal hat woukt‘require this court to refer the motion for hearing, He fails to stato a valid ground for recusal. ‘Therefore, the motion is denied. ‘The legal authority cited by plainti? in his motion provides for the recusation of an individual presiding judge. Tt does not provide for an en bane recusal. This court questions ‘whether there is a procedural mechanism to recuse all ofthe judges of Fifteenth Judicial District by way of one motion filed in one division. It seems as though the Code provides a mechanism {forthe individual judge to determine whether to recuse him or herself only, Plantf?'s motion is procedurlly improper and lacks authority. Therefore, the motion is denied. IT IS HEARBY ORDERED, ADIUDGED AND DECREED, that plaintiffs Motion for Recusation is denied. ‘THUS DONE AND SIGNED on this the 15th day of March, 2017, in Acadia Parish, Crowley, Louisiana. PLEASE NOTICE ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD