From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brock v. Thompson

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Jun 29, 2021
CIVIL 2:21-CV-10585 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 29, 2021)

Opinion

CIVIL 2:21-CV-10585

06-29-2021

COREY WILFORD BROCK, Plaintiff, v. THOMPSON, Defendant,


OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE MOTION TO ADD DEFENDANTS AND TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT (ECF NO. 18)

HON. VICTORIA A. ROBERTS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On May 19, 2021, the Court summarily denied Plaintiff's civil rights complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Plaintiff filed two Notices of Appeal (ECF No. 15, 21). He also filed an amended complaint (ECF No. 17) and a Motion to Add Defendants and to Amend the Complaint. (ECF No. 18).

For the reasons that follow, the Motion is DENIED.

Because Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the Motion to Amend the Complaint; a notice of appeal generally “confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.” Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 470 U.S. 373, 379 (1985)(citing Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982)(per curiam)); See also Workman v. Tate, 958 F.2d 164, 167 (6th Cir. 1992). See Hester v. Morgan, 52 Fed.Appx. 220, 225 (6th Cir. 2002).

The Motion to Add Defendants and to Amend the Complaint (ECF No. 18) is DENIED.


Summaries of

Brock v. Thompson

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Jun 29, 2021
CIVIL 2:21-CV-10585 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 29, 2021)
Case details for

Brock v. Thompson

Case Details

Full title:COREY WILFORD BROCK, Plaintiff, v. THOMPSON, Defendant,

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Jun 29, 2021

Citations

CIVIL 2:21-CV-10585 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 29, 2021)