Nearly two months after throwing out the majority of claims brought by a high-profile Utah banker acquitted of drug possession and child endangerment charges, a federal judge has removed himself from a civil lawsuit arising from the failed prosecution.
U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell announced his decision Tuesday in a letter mailed to attorneys for all parties in the multimillion-dollar lawsuit. The judge's decision appears to rest primarily on his wife's recent hiring by the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office, whose attorneys were named as defendants in the original lawsuit but have since been dismissed.
Dale Moroni Gibbons sued police and prosecutors in June 2002, alleging, among other things, defamation of character, wrongful arrest and malicious prosecution. The case was initially filed in state court, but was transferred to Utah's federal court in November 2002.
Last month, Cassell dismissed all but two of the original 21 defendants, setting the stage for a trial only on Gibbons' claims that two Salt Lake County sheriff's deputies planted drugs in his nightstand drawer during a search of his Holladay home in June 2001.
Even then, the skeptical judge noted that he believed the jury would "in all likelihood" find in the officers' favor.
Darwin Overson, an attorney for Gibbons, said Wednesday he has not yet decided whether to ask Stewart to reconsider Cassell's February decision to dismiss the bulk of the case. Still, Overson said, he and his colleagues were pleased with Cassell's decision.
The case has been randomly reassigned to U.S. District Judge Ted Stewart.
Gibbons' attorneys alleged Cassell had made repeated comments, both orally and in writing, expressing his belief that Gibbons had little chance of prevailing at trial. In a motion calling for Cassell's recusal, attorneys cite two occasions in which Cassell remarked upon the number of claims contained in Gibbons' lawsuit, saying it appeared attorneys had "thrown everything against the wall in hopes that something would stick."
The statements, as well as other remarks made during the course of litigation, "call (Cassell's) impartiality into question," the motion states.
In a late-February hearing, Cassell defended his comments as a proper analysis of the case before him. And in his Tuesday letter, the judge does not address those issues. Rather, he focuses on his wife's recent hiring by the District Attorney's Office and his former law clerk's temporary employment with the same agency.
"None of the foregoing reasons provide ground for recusal," Cassell wrote, nonetheless adding that "highly unusual circumstances" in the case require him to recuse himself.
The judge notes in his letter that he first informed attorneys in April 2004 that his wife had applied for a job with the District Attorney's Office. At that time, he said, no one appeared to have concerns about a possible conflict of interest arising from the application. She was not hired at that time, but reapplied with the office in February and accepted a position earlier this month.
E-mail: awelling@desnews.com