Lumumba File

Case: 25CI1:15-cv-00526-JAW
Document #: 12
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 1 of 5
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA
PLAINTIFF
v.
CAUSE NO. 15-526
TONEY A. BALDWIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND

INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES; BALDWIN & BALDWIN, PLLC;
AND DOE DEFENDANTS 1-5
DEFENDANTS
MOTION TO RECUSE
By this Motion, Plaintiff Chokwe A. Lumumba, and pursuant to Canon 3E(1), Code of
Judicial Conduct, moves the Honorable Jeff Weill, Judge of the Circuit Court of Hinds County,
First Judicial District, to recuse himself, and shows the following:
1.
That the subject case has been assigned to the Honorable Jeff Weill, pursuant to a
random selection process.

2.
Judge Weill has extensive history with the Plaintiff and his family, including a bar
complaint the Plaintiffs father Chokwe Lumumba.

3.
That Judge Weill should be disqualified and/or recused from adjudicating in any
manner whatsoever in the subject proceedings in that Judge Weill's impartiality might reasonably
be questioned,
4.
Canon 3E(1), Code of Judicial Conduct, Disqualification, provides in pertinent
part:
Judges should disqualify themselves in proceedings in which their
impartiality might be questioned by a reasonable person knowing
all the circumstances or for other grounds provide in the code of
Judicial Conduct or otherwise as provided by law,
5.
Document #: 12
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 2 of 5
The Defendant feels that should Judge Weill fail to disqualify himself, his
impartiality might be open to question under the guidelines promulgated both by the American
Bar Association and Mississippi law.
Under those guidelines, Judges should disqualify
themselves not only when their impartiality may be questioned, but they should disqualify
themselves in order to avoid the very appearance of impropriety.
6.
Judge Weill's impartiality might be questioned by a reasonable person knowing
that Judge Weill had a pending bar complaint against the Plaintiffs father.
7.
The affidavit of Chokwe A. Lumumba, as required by Rule 1.15 of the
Mississippi Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court, is attached hereto and incorporated as if
fully set forth herein by reference.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that Judge Weill
recuse himself, or in the alternative, that an evidentiary hearing be held to divulge the facts
herein and that said Judge then recuse himself.
Respectfully submitted this the 4th day of February, 2016.
CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA
Counsel for Plaintiff:
__ /s/ Thomas J. Bellinder, Esq. ________

Thomas J. Bellinder (MSB # 103115)
BELLINDER LAW FIRM
Pinnacle at Jackson Place
190 E. Capitol Street, Suite 460
Jackson, MS 39201
Phone: (601) 487-9340
Fax: (601) 265-1795
Email: Thomas.Bellinder@gmail.com
Document #: 12
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 3 of 5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned counsel does hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
document has been forwarded to opposing counsel via hand-delivery, electronic means, U.S.
Mail and/or facsimile to their usual place of business, to-wit:
Robert L. Gibbs
GibbsWhitwell PLLC
1400 Meadowbrook Road, Suite 100
Jackson, MS 39205
rgibbs@gibbswhitwell.com
This the 4th day of February, 2016.
BY: __ /s/ Thomas J. Bellinder, Esq. ______
Document #: 12
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 4 of 5
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA
v.
PLAINTIFF
CAUSE NO. 15-526
TONEY A. BALDWIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND

INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES; BALDWIN & BALDWIN, PLLC;
AND DOE DEFENDANTS 1-5
DEFENDANTS
AFFIDAVIT OF CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
COUNTY OF RANKIN
I, CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA, being duly sworn, state under oath as follows:
1.
I am the Plaintiff in the above entitled cause.
2.
This case has been assigned to Judge Jeff Weill.
3.
Judge Weill filed a bar complaint against my father for alleged behavior occurring during
the last and only trial he tried before Judge Weill.

4.
Among other things Judge Weill noted in his complaint that the defendant in that case
was found not guilty. Judge Weill appears to reference this not guilty verdict as an undesired
result that was either caused by or an unfortunate consequence of my fathers behavior in that
case.
5.
In the previous trial Judge Weill demonstrated bias against the defendant and my father.
6.
Despite learning that there was no evidence that the defendant or my father had been
notified of his trial date until shortly before the trial, Judge Weill refused to grant the defendant a
continuance.
Judge Weill's refusal to grant the continuance was lodged over my fathers
representation that he was unprepared for trial. It should be noted that the defendant was
charged with armed robbery, which carries a possible life sentence. Further, Judge Weill refused
Document #: 12
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 5 of 5
to grant the continuance after the District Attorney agreed to the same. Judge Weill also
disallowed the defendant an opportunity to negotiate a plea agreement with the State. It should
also be noted that Judge Weill refused to discuss the case with Defense Counsel without the
presence of one or more of the Assistant District Attorneys who were white. He would not
discuss the case with the Defense Attorney who was black and the District Attorney who was
black, without the presence of the District Attorney's white assistants. The case involved a black
criminal defendant. Judge Weill is white.
7.
This prior case before Judge Weill is the only one that my father encountered in his 36
years of practice where the Judge required that the assistant prosecutor be present for discussion
and argument on Motions when the District Attorney was available for argument on the motions.
8.
Judge Weill's behavior in the previous trial indicated bias against my father and his client.
His behavior in that trial suggested an exercise of racial preference with respect to pretrial
motion consideration.
9.
Judge Weill prosecuted a bar complaint against my father, which I believe disqualifies
him as an objective judge in the present case.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT.
_________________________________
Chokwe A. Lumumba
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the _____ day of ___________________, 2016.
_________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
____________________
Document #: 12-1
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 1 of 5
Document #: 12-1
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 2 of 5
Document #: 12-1
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 3 of 5
Document #: 12-1
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 4 of 5
Document #: 12-1
Filed: 02/04/2016
Page 5 of 5
Document #: 7
Filed: 02/18/2016
Page 1 of 1
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
CHOKWE ANT AR LUMUMBA
PLAINTIFF
vs.
CAUSE NO.: 251-16-115
ST. DOMINIC'S HOSPITAL, ET AL
DEFENDANT
0
The undersigned hereby recuses himself from the above styled and numbered
cause because plaintiff is an attorney who aptJ1ars before me in court.
SO ORDERED, this
day of February, 2016
WINSTON L. KIDD
CIRCUIT JUDGE
Document #: 14
Filed: 02/22/2016
Page 1 of 4
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF

HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA
VS.
PLAINTIFF
CAUSE NO. 25CI1:15-cv-00526JAW
TONEY A. BALDWIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL

AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES;
BALDWIN & BALDWIN, PLLC AND
DOE DEFENDANTS 1-5
DEFENDANTS
RESPONSE AND MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION

TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO RECUSE
COMES NOW, Defendants, Toney A. Baldwin, in his Official and Individual Capacities
and Baldwin & Baldwin, PLLC (hereinafter Defendants), by and through undersigned
counsel, and files this their Response in Opposition Plaintiffs Motion To Recuse and would
show unto the Court as follows:
1. On or about October 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendants alleging
Negligence, Gross Negligence, Intentional Interference with Business Contract, Res Ipsa
Loquitur, Civil Conspiracy and Tortious Interference with Business Relationships. This case was
assigned to this Honorable Court at that time.
2. On November 30, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint. In
the Motion, Defendants attached the affidavits of the clients in question disputing Plaintiffs
version of the facts. On December 14, 2015, Plaintiff responded to Defendants Motion to
Dismiss.
3. On February 4, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Recuse. It is worth noting that this
motion was filed some four (4) months after this case was filed and after Defendants filed their
Motion to Dismiss. In other words, there was only a problem with this Honorable Court
presiding over this case after Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss.
Document #: 14
Filed: 02/22/2016
Page 2 of 4
4. Nonetheless, Plaintiffs Motion does not meet the requirements of Rule 1.15 of the
Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court, which states in pertinent part:
A motion seeking recusal shall be filed with an affidavit of the party or
the party's attorney setting forth the factual basis underlying the asserted
grounds for recusal and declaring that the motion is filed in good faith
and that the affiant truly believes the facts underlying the grounds stated
to be true. Such motion shall, in the first instance, be filed with the judge
who is the subject of the motion within 30 days following notification to
the parties of the name of the judge assigned to the case; or, if it is based
upon facts which could not reasonably have been known to the filing party
within such time, it shall be filed within 30 days after the filing party
could reasonably discover the facts underlying the grounds asserted. The
subject judge shall consider and rule on the motion within 30 days of the
filing of the motion, with hearing if necessary. If a hearing is held, it shall
be on the record in open court.
5. Plaintiff knew at the time of the filing of this law suit that it was assigned to this
Honorable Court. In fact, the new electronic filing system (MEC) sends notification to attorneys
alerting them to any filings and the assigned court. Furthermore, Plaintiffs father died in 2013.
Therefore, any believed animosity between Plaintiffs father and this Court was known prior to
this case being filed. However, Plaintiff waited until four months after this case was filed and
two months after Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss/Motion For Summary Judgment to file a
Motion to Recuse. It is clear Plaintiffs motion is untimely.
6. However, if this Court does find that Plaintiffs motion is not untimely filed. The facts
Document #: 14
Filed: 02/22/2016
Page 3 of 4
presented by Plaintiff are not sufficient for this Court to recuse itself. The Mississippi Code of
Judicial Conduct provides the standard for disqualification of judges. Code of Judicial Conduct,
Canon 3(E). Pursuant to Canon 3, subdivision E, of the Code of Judicial Conduct states, Judges
should disqualify themselves in proceedings in which their impartiality might be questioned by a
reasonable person knowing all the circumstances or for other grounds provided in the Code of
Judicial Conduct or otherwise as provided by law. (Emphasis added). Illustrative of that
standard are several instances listed in Canon 3(E)(1)(a)-(d) where the judge should recuse
himself/herself, none of which are present here.
7. There is no reason for this court to recuse itself from this case. Plaintiff relies on a bar
Complaint filed by his late father several years ago. However, that bar complaint has nothing to
do with Plaintiff and certainly nothing to do with this case. Neither does the fact that Plaintiff
represents two attorneys that has filed bar complaints against this court. Especially when it is
undetermined if these complaints even have merit. None of these circumstances would cause a
reasonable person to view this court as being impartial. The Mississippi Supreme Court has
consistently held that there is a presumption that a judge, sworn to administer impartial justice,
is qualified and unbiased. To overcome the presumption, the evidence must produce a
reasonable doubt (about the validity of the presumption) [.] Turner v. State, 573 So.2d 657,
678 (Miss.1990). Under the circumstances presented, Plaintiff has failed to overcome this
presumption. Therefore, Plaintiff Motion to Recuse is meritless and should be denied.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendants respectfully request that the
Court enter an order denying Plaintiffs Motion to Recuse and for any other relief that is just in
the premises.
Document #: 14
Filed: 02/22/2016
Page 4 of 4
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this the 22nd day of February, 2016.

Respectfully submitted,
AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES AND
BALDWIN & BALDWIN, PLLC
s/ Robert L. Gibbs
Robert L. Gibbs
OF COUNSEL:
Robert L. Gibbs, MSB No. 4816
Gibbs Travis PLLC
Jackson, Mississippi 39211
Telephone: 601-487-2640
Facsimile: 601-366-4295
Email: rgibbs@gibbstravis.com
The undersigned hereby certifies that a true copy of the foregoing was duly served upon
all known counsel of record, this the 22nd day of February, 2016, and upon all parties registered
with the Courts electronic filing system by operation of the Courts ECF system.
s/ Robert L. Gibbs
Robert L. Gibbs
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 1 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 2 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 3 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 4 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 5 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 6 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 7 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 8 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 9 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 10 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 11 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 12 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 13 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 14 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 15 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 16 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 17 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 18 of 19
Document #: 2
Filed: 10/13/2015
Page 19 of 19
Document #: 8
Filed: 11/30/2015
Page 1 of 5
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF

HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA
VS.
PLAINTIFF
CAUSE NO. 25CI1:15-cv-00526JAW

AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES;
BALDWIN & BALDWIN, PLLC AND
DOE DEFENDANTS 1-5
DEFENDANTS
MOTION TO DISMISS AND/OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

COMES NOW, Defendants, Toney A. Baldwin, in his Official and Individual Capacities
and Baldwin & Baldwin, PLLC (hereinafter Baldwin), by and through counsel of record and
moves this Court to Dismiss this action pursuant to M.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) and/or for Summary
Judgment pursuant to M.R.C.P. 56. And for cause thereof would state the following:
1.
This is an action for Negligence, Gross Negligence, Intentional Interference with
Business Contract, Res Ipsa Loquitur, Civil Conspiracy and Tortious Interference with Business
Relationships. According to the allegations of the Complaint Defendant Toney A. Baldwin, an
attorney licensed to practice in the State of Mississippi, reached out to and met with Kayla Clark
and Charita Kennedy while Clark and Kennedy were represented by Plaintiff, Chokwe A.
Lumumba, also an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Mississippi. The Complaint,
alleges that Baldwin knew Clark and Kennedy were represented by Plaintiff, but Baldwin, in
violation of the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct encouraged Clark and Kennedy to
breach a validly executed Contract for Legal Services. As will be demonstrated by affidavits
from the two people who are at the center of this dispute, Clark and Kennedy, these allegations
have no basis in fact and Plaintiff and his attorney filed the instant lawsuit without properly
Document #: 8
Filed: 11/30/2015
Page 2 of 5
investigating the facts and thus violated M.R.C.P. 11 and the Mississippi Litigation
Accountability Act, Mississippi Code 11-55-1, et seq.
2.
The true facts of this case, as evidenced by the affidavits of Clark and Kennedy
are that Clark and Kennedy never sought out Plaintiff to represent them. But on July 14, 2015, a
few days after Plaintiff entered into a Contract for Legal Services (Contract) (Exhibit A)
with Frances Sanders - Clark and Kennedy were invited to the home of Sanders. Once Clark and
Kennedy arrived they learned that Sanders had scheduled a meeting with Plaintiff. At the
meeting Plaintiff encouraged Clark and Kennedy to hire him to represent them in litigation
involving the death of Jonathan Sanders, who had been killed by an officer in Clarke County.
Frances Sanders is the mother of Jonathan Sanders and Clark and Kennedy are mothers of
Jonathan Sanders two children. At this so called meeting, Clark and Kennedy initially refused
to sign the Contract with Plaintiff, but through pressure and what Clark and Kennedy felt was
intimidation, Clark and Kennedy signed the Contract. It should be noted that the Contract was
not prepared for Clark and Kennedy, but was the one prepared for and executed by Frances
Sanders. As Clark and Kennedy states in their affidavits, (Exhibits B and C), they had
already made a decision that we would get our own attorneys. (See 4 of Exhibits B and
C).
Following the execution of the Contract, Clark felt that she really needed her own
attorney. This feeling turned into a decision to hire her own attorney by a number of events.
First, there was no communication between her and Plaintiff. Second, Clarks friends were
encouraging her to get her own attorney. She was told that her interest and the interest of her
child were different than the interest of Ms. Sanders, which was the mother of Jonathan Sanders.
Third, a dispute occurred between Ms. Sanders, Clark and Kennedy when Sanders accused
Document #: 8
Filed: 11/30/2015
Page 3 of 5
Kennedy of stealing money belonging to Jonathan Sanders, this was the final straw. Thereafter,
Clark sought out Baldwin, whom she had met shortly after Jonathans death and before the July
14, 2015 execution date of the contract.
It was Clark who sought out Baldwin. However, Baldwin refused to meet with or discuss
this matter with her while she was Plaintiffs client.
Thereafter, Clark drafted a short
handwritten letter (Exhibit D), terminating Plaintiff as her attorney. It was only after receiving
this handwritten termination letter did Baldwin discuss this case with Clark. Later Kennedy,
after speaking with Clark, made the decision to terminate Plaintiff and retain Baldwin. (Exhibit
E). Once Baldwin was retained he learned that no one had opened an estate on Jonathans
behalf, even though the Contract between Plaintiff and Frances Sanders stated that Frances
Sanders was an Administratrix.
Therefore, Baldwin filed Petition for Letters of
Administration and to Employ Attorney and Approval of Contingency Contract on behalf of

Clark. The Chancery Court of Clarke County entered a Decree on August 12, 2015 appointing
Clark as Administratrix and approving the Employment Contract with Baldwin to prosecute the
wrongful death claim.
As the above facts demonstrate, Baldwin did not interfere with a business contract, and
the Complaint was filed without any investigation into the facts. Also, there is no negligence or
gross negligence in that Baldwin did not owe a duty to Plaintiff, thus there was no breach of
duty. Res Ipsa Loquitur is likewise not applicable. Res Ipsa Loquitur presumes negligence if
Baldwin had complete control over what caused the injury even though there is no specific
evidence of negligence. As stated earlier, there is no negligence because there is no duty and
thus no breach of duty. Further, Plaintiff has not been injured. Finally, there is no civil
conspiracy because Toney A. Baldwin and Baldwin & Baldwin are the same. In fact, Toney A.
Document #: 8
Filed: 11/30/2015
Page 4 of 5
Baldwin is sued both in his individual and official capacities, which means he is sued as Baldwin
& Baldwin. The law is clear one cannot conspire with himself. Further, based on the undisputed
facts there are no facts to support this or Plaintiffs other theory of relief.
3.
Based on the affidavits of Baldwin, Clark and Kennedy it is clear that there are no
facts to support the allegations of the Complaint, and since there are no disputed facts, judgment
should be entered on behalf of Baldwin.
WHEREFORE, PREMIESES CONSIDERED, Baldwin moves the Court to dismiss this
matter for failure to state a claim and because the facts are not disputed, grant judgment as a
matter of law. Baldwin also moves the Court for such other relief as it deems appropriate.
This the 30th day of November, 2015.
Respectfully submitted,
AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES AND
BALDWIN & BALDWIN, PLLC
s/ Robert L. Gibbs
Robert L. Gibbs
OF COUNSEL:
Robert L. Gibbs, MSB No. 4816
Gibbs Whitwell & Travis PLLC
Jackson, Mississippi 39211
Telephone: 601-487-2640
Facsimile: 601-366-4295
Email: rgibbs@gibbswhitwell.com
Document #: 8
Filed: 11/30/2015
Page 5 of 5
The undersigned hereby certifies that a true copy of the foregoing was duly served upon
all known counsel of record, this the 30th day of November, 2015, and upon all parties registered
with the Courts electronic filing system by operation of the Courts ECF system.
s/ Robert L. Gibbs
Robert L. Gibbs

Lumumba File

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lumumba File

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lumumba File

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case: 25CI1:15-cv-00526-JAW

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

CAUSE NO. 15-526

TONEY A. BALDWIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND

random selection process.

complaint the Plaintiffs father Chokwe Lumumba.

Canon 3E(1), Code of Judicial Conduct, Disqualification, provides in pertinent

Under those guidelines, Judges should disqualify

Judge Weill's impartiality might be questioned by a reasonable person knowing

The affidavit of Chokwe A. Lumumba, as required by Rule 1.15 of the

Counsel for Plaintiff:

__ /s/ Thomas J. Bellinder, Esq. ________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

TONEY A. BALDWIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND

AFFIDAVIT OF CHOKWE A. LUMUMBA

I am the Plaintiff in the above entitled cause.

This case has been assigned to Judge Jeff Weill.

the last and only trial he tried before Judge Weill.

him as an objective judge in the present case.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

CHOKWE ANT AR LUMUMBA

CAUSE NO.: 251-16-115

ST. DOMINIC'S HOSPITAL, ET AL

day of February, 2016

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF

TONEY A. BALDWIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL

RESPONSE AND MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this the 22nd day of February, 2016.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF

TONEY A. BALDWIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL

MOTION TO DISMISS AND/OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

This is an action for Negligence, Gross Negligence, Intentional Interference with

Thereafter, Clark drafted a short

Therefore, Baldwin filed Petition for Letters of

Administration and to Employ Attorney and Approval of Contingency Contract on behalf of

You might also like

/s/ Thomas J. Bellinder, Esq. ______