From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilkey v. Prot. One Alarm Monitoring, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Nov 5, 2013
Case No. 12-1150-EFM (D. Kan. Nov. 5, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 12-1150-EFM

11-05-2013

CHRISTOPHER J. GILKEY, Plaintiff, v. PROTECTION ONE ALARM MONITORING, INC., Defendant.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This Court previously granted Defendant's motions to dismiss and for summary judgment. Plaintiff appealed these decisions, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed those rulings. Following the appellate court's order, Plaintiff moved to reopen the case. The Court denied that motion. Plaintiff has now filed for reconsideration of the Court's order denying his motion to reopen (Doc. 42). This motion essentially is addressed by the same legal standards as his motion to reopen, and for the same reasons is denied. Plaintiff must accept that, whether or not he is satisfied with the result, this case is over. No further motions should be filed.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 42) is hereby DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

ERIC F. MELGREN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Gilkey v. Prot. One Alarm Monitoring, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Nov 5, 2013
Case No. 12-1150-EFM (D. Kan. Nov. 5, 2013)
Case details for

Gilkey v. Prot. One Alarm Monitoring, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER J. GILKEY, Plaintiff, v. PROTECTION ONE ALARM MONITORING…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Date published: Nov 5, 2013

Citations

Case No. 12-1150-EFM (D. Kan. Nov. 5, 2013)