From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Sac. Co. Jail

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 3, 2012
No. CIV S-11-1027 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2012)

Opinion

No. CIV S-11-1027 CKD P

01-03-2012

TERRENCE L. DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. SAC. CO. JAIL, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's November 21, 2011 screening order. A court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law." Id. at 1263.

Plaintiff fails to point to anything suggesting reconsideration of the November 21, 2011 screening order is warranted. Plaintiff's motion is vague and contains pages of extraneous and confusing material. Plaintiff is cautioned that if he continues to file documents similar in content to this, the court will impose page limitations on the documents plaintiff may file, limit the number of documents plaintiff may file, or impose other sanctions.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's December 23, 2011 motion for reconsideration is denied.

____________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
1/mp
davi1027.mfr


Summaries of

Davis v. Sac. Co. Jail

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 3, 2012
No. CIV S-11-1027 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2012)
Case details for

Davis v. Sac. Co. Jail

Case Details

Full title:TERRENCE L. DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. SAC. CO. JAIL, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 3, 2012

Citations

No. CIV S-11-1027 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2012)