Nicole Allan/ Melissa Bailey File Photos
Judge Janet Arterton and attorney Karen Torre.
U.S. District Judge Janet Bond Arterton (pictured) said she has no reason to step down from the Ricci firefighter case, but she’s seeking a second opinion from a different judge anyway.
That was the latest development in the “New Haven 20” reverse discrimination lawsuit against the city. The case, filed by Frank Ricci and 19 other city firefighters, is being hashed out in New Haven U.S. District Court after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs last summer. Ricci and his colleagues have been promoted after claiming they were unfairly passed over because of their race; Judge Arterton is now determining the question of damages.
Progress has been halted by a move by the plaintiffs’ fiery attorney, Karen Torre, to have Arterton tossed off the case. In a flurry of motions and high-tension hearings over the last two months, Torre asked Arterton to recuse herself due to alleged biases and conflicts of interest, including associations with known “feminists.” Click here to read an in-depth story about that.
In a ruling filed March 12, Arterton maintained she has no reason to remove herself from the case. She determined another judge should make a final call on that question. She ordered the clerk to assign the matter of recusal at random to a new judge, as is common court procedure.
U.S. District Judge Peter C. Dorsey got the assignment. He is tasked with deciding whether a reasonable person familiar with the facts of the case would “reasonably question the judge’s impartiality.” In the past couple of weeks, he heard from both sides on the recusal issue through documents filed in court.
Torre maintained Arterton is not fit to impartially rule on the Ricci case.
In a counter-motion, the city said Arterton has no reason to be booted off the case. Any potential conflicts of interest should have been dealt with four years ago, the city argued. Click here to read the city’s motion, filed by the firm of Nuzzo & Roberts.
In a counter-counter motion, Torre said the city ignored the substance of her claims, including one key aspect: An alleged professional conflict of interest involving Judge Arterton and attorney David Rosen, who’s representing Michael Briscoe, an intervenor in the case. Click here to read Torre’s filing.
As of Thursday, Dorsey had yet to issue a decision.
Past stories on fire department promotions and the Ricci case:
• Torre Blasts Ricci Judge For Consorting With “Feminists”
• Judge Swings Back; Ricci Case Stalls
• “Tinney Intervenors” Step Down In Ricci Case
• Ricci Victors Seek Damages
• After 6‑Year Battle, Firefighters Get Badges
• Ricci Case’s “Tinney Intervenors” Try Again
• 10 More Firefighters Promoted
• Judge Blocks Black Firefighters’ Move
• Board Promotes 14 Firefighters
• Judge Orders Firefighter Promotions
• Black Firefighters Seek To Halt Promotions
• Promotions Pitched In Ricci Case
• Ricci’s Back In Court
• After Ricci Ruling, Black Firefighter Sues City
• Ricci Takes The Stand
• In D.C., Two Latino Views On Sotomayor
• Dems Swing Back On Ricci
• ConnectiCOSH Kibosh
• Sotomayor: I Didn’t “Hide” Ricci Case
• Is Ricci Being Smeared?
• Sotomayor Speaks On Ricci
• Ricci Takes Center Stage
• Watley: I’d Have Promoted Ricci
• Firebirds, NAACP: Ricci Won’t Stop Us
• “If You Work Hard You Can Succeed In America”
• Was He The Culprit?
• Supreme Court Overturns City On Ricci
• On Page 25, A Hint
• Minority Firefighters Vow Post-Ricci Unity
• Ricci Ruling Won’t End Quest
• Ricci, Sotomayor Brand DeStefano
• Firefighter Case Reveals Surprise Obama Stand
• Justices Zero In On Race-Based Distinctions
• Rights Groups Back Black Firefighters
• The Supreme Stakes: Title VII’s Future
• Dobbs v. Bolden
• Latino Group Backs White Firefighters
• Black Firefighters: Ricci Case Poses Grave Threat
• NAACP Backs City In Firefighter Case
• Paging Justice Kennedy
• Fire Inspectors Promoted
• Fire Inspector List Approved
• U.S. Supreme Court To Hear Firefighters’ Case
• Fire Promotions Examined in Supreme Court