REBECCA KOHLER
v.
GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

M.D. Fla. | 2025-11-03
No. 8:25-cv-2258
2025 FFL 28163 District Court, M.D. Florida (2025) Caution

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

A magistrate judge sua sponte recused himself from a case brought by Rebecca Kohler against GEICO General Insurance Company due to a financial interest in one of the parties, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). The case was reassigned to another judge by random draw.


Holding

The judge determined that recusal was warranted due to a financial interest in one of the parties, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). The case was reassigned to another magistrate judge by random draw.


Key Quotes

“Under 28 U.S.C. § 455, a judge must disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Establishes the legal standard for judicial recusal

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

This is a civil insurance dispute between plaintiff Rebecca Kohler and defendant GEICO General Insurance Company. The judge discovered a financial int…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

This cause is before the Court sua sponte. Under 28 U.S.C. § 455, a judge must disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. See 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). And if the proper grounds do exist, a judge has an affirmative and self-enforcing obligation to remove himself from a case on his own accord. See United States v. Kelly, 888 F. 2d 732, 744 (11th Cir. 1989).

After careful review, the undersigned has determined that his recusal is warranted in this action due to a financial interest in one of the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to reassign this case to another magistrate judge by random draw and to provide notice to the parties of the newly designated magistrate judge.

SO ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 3rd day of November 2025.

Christopher P. dib HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER P. TUITE United States Magistrate Judge

Copies to: Counsel of record


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw