Lawyer Seeks Recusal of Georgia Judge William M. Ray II in Katt Williams Case Due to Alleged Bias

On Monday, September 15, 2025, Law360 reported that Loletha Denise Hale, an attorney representing four women suing comedian Katt Williams in Georgia federal court, filed a motion requesting that U.S. District Judge William M. Ray II recuse himself from the case, alleging bias.

The motion, filed on Friday, claims Judge Ray has demonstrated a personal bias against Hale, suggesting her clients will not receive fair treatment. The plaintiffs are seeking damages from Williams related to a 2016 altercation outside an Atlanta nightclub.

Hale’s motion stems from a hearing last month where the judge questioned her “honesty, candor and credibility” regarding a brief containing artificial intelligence-generated hallucinations. The problematic brief was submitted in response to Williams’ motion for summary judgment. Hale explained that her daughter, assisting her on the case but not a legal professional, inadvertently uploaded an AI-generated brief saved under the same name as the intended filing. She attributed the error to being distracted by a close friend’s funeral scheduled for that day and emphasized that she filed the correct version before the August 27 hearing.

Hale argues that Judge Ray’s threat to sanction her for the erroneous citations “appears retaliatory and designed to chill advocacy, rather than grounded in procedural necessity.” She insists the error was a mistake, not an intentional violation of federal rules of procedure.

Judge Ray had issued a show-cause order for a hearing later this month to address potential sanctions, noting that “17 of the 24 cases cited by plaintiffs’ counsel either did not exist, did not support the proposition for which they were cited or misquoted the authority.”

Williams’ legal team has opposed Hale’s request to withdraw the AI-tainted brief, alleging that her withdrawal motion itself contained another hallucinated case reference. Williams is seeking to have his motion for summary judgment granted, either on its merits or as a sanction for the filing errors.

Hale further contends that Judge Ray’s bias is evident in his reference during the August hearing to an unrelated case where she testified. She claims Judge Ray stated he should have held a Rule 11 hearing during that prior civil matter regarding her testimony about a state court judge’s removal from the bench. Hale argues that the threat of Rule 11 proceedings lacks justification, as there has been no showing of improper purpose or false statements in the current action.

Hale is requesting Judge Ray’s replacement with another judge from the Northern District of Georgia and a stay pending resolution of the recusal motion.

Gabe Banks of Banks Weaver LLC, counsel for Williams, dismissed Hale’s motion as a “frivolous attempt” to remove a judge who called out discovery misconduct. Banks asserted the motion lacks merit and that Hale’s conduct warrants Rule 11 sanctions for submitting frivolous legal documents and continuing to cite fictitious case law.