From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McNeil v. City of Omaha

United States District Court, D. Nebraska
Oct 16, 2007
8:07CV145 (D. Neb. Oct. 16, 2007)

Opinion

8:07CV145.

October 16, 2007


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


This matter is before the court on eight separate motions filed by Plaintiff. (Filing Nos. 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 23.) Summarized and condensed, the motions request copies, amendments to the complaint, the issuance of subpoenas, and the appointment of a guardian ad litem. ( Id.)

This matter was dismissed and judgment was entered on May 16, 2007. (Filing Nos. 12 and 13.) Plaintiff did not appeal and the time in which to do so has passed. See Fed.R.App.P. 4(1). Plaintiff currently has two other pending cases in this court. ( See Case Nos. 8:07CV143 and 8:07CV149.) Plaintiff has filed nearly identical motions in these two other cases and appears to simply be filing all motions in all cases, including this closed case. The substance of Plaintiff's eight pending motions relates to his two pending cases and not to this closed case.

Plaintiff's motions are therefore denied. If plaintiff requires copies of court documents, he should contact the Clerk of the court to determine the proper method of requesting and paying for copies. To the extent that Plaintiff is filing documents in this case that are duplicative of those filed in his pending cases, Plaintiff is instructed that such filings are unnecessary.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

Plaintiff's pending motions (filing nos. 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 23) are denied.


Summaries of

McNeil v. City of Omaha

United States District Court, D. Nebraska
Oct 16, 2007
8:07CV145 (D. Neb. Oct. 16, 2007)
Case details for

McNeil v. City of Omaha

Case Details

Full title:JAMAAL A. McNEIL, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF OMAHA, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Nebraska

Date published: Oct 16, 2007

Citations

8:07CV145 (D. Neb. Oct. 16, 2007)