Rouviere v. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc.
- Gregory Woods
- 1:18-cv-04814
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 10
In Rouviere v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Judge Stein denied Jodi Rouviere’s request to disqualify him because past stock ownership did not establish apparent partiality.
The ruling affected Jodi Rouviere’s request to remove Magistrate Judge Gary Stein from the case. Judge Stein remained assigned to the matter, and the motion was terminated.
What happened
In Rouviere v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Jodi Rouviere asked to disqualify Magistrate Judge Gary Stein from the case. She relied on his financial disclosure report, which showed that he had received $1,000 or less in dividends from Stryker, the parent company of defendant Howmedica.
Judge Stein explained that the dividends and Stryker stock were connected to a period before he became a judge. He confirmed that the dividends were paid and the stock was sold before his appointment, and that neither he nor his spouse had owned Stryker stock while he was assigned to the case.
Judge Stein denied the disqualification motion. He ruled that a reasonable person aware of the facts would not find an appearance of partiality because he had no financial interest in any party when he became a judge or was assigned to the case.
The detailed version
- Rouviere v. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-04814
- Gregory Woods
- Dec. 12, 2024
Background
This products-liability case was brought by Jodi Rouviere and Andre Rouviere. The case continued against DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. and Howmedica Osteonics Corporation, doing business as Stryker Orthopaedics, after other defendants were dismissed. The district court later entered summary judgments for both remaining defendants, and the Court of Appeals affirmed those rulings.
After the case was reassigned to Judge Gregory H. Woods as district judge and Judge Gary Stein as magistrate judge, Jodi Rouviere filed a motion asking Judge Stein to disqualify himself under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). She pointed to Judge Stein’s initial financial disclosure report, which listed dividends of $1,000 or less from Stryker Corporation. Stryker was identified in the opinion as the parent corporation of defendant Howmedica.
Legal standard
Section 455(a) requires a federal judge to disqualify himself when his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The court applied an objective test: whether a reasonable person who knew all the facts would have significant doubt about the judge’s impartiality.
The opinion also discussed Section 455(b)(4), which requires disqualification when a judge currently has a financial interest in a party or in the subject of the case. Judge Stein concluded that this provision did not apply because he sold all Stryker stock and received the dividends before becoming a judge. He also stated that neither he nor his spouse had owned Stryker stock while he was assigned to the case.
Court’s analysis
Judge Stein distinguished a Court of Appeals decision involving a judge whose spouse owned stock in a defendant while the judge presided over the case. Here, Judge Stein had not owned Stryker stock at any time after becoming a judge or after being designated to the case. He therefore concluded that the circumstance creating an appearance of partiality in that earlier decision was not present here.
The court also noted that Jodi Rouviere identified no case, and Judge Stein was aware of none, holding that a judge’s financial interest in a party before the judge’s appointment required disqualification. The opinion further stated that even a judge’s prior representation of a party before taking the bench does not automatically require disqualification.
Ruling
Judge Gary Stein concluded that a reasonable person knowing all the facts would not find an appearance of impropriety or partiality. He stated that he had no interest in any party since becoming a judge or being designated to the case. The court therefore denied Jodi Rouviere’s motion for disqualification and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at Docket No. 377.
Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.