From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

More v. R L Carriers

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Feb 11, 2002
No. 00 CV 5583 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 11, 2002)

Opinion

No. 00 CV 5583.

February 11, 2002.


ORDER


Plaintiff has filed a pleading containing a number of motions. The rulings on those motions are as follows:

(1) Plaintiff here seems to be asking the court to summarily rule on a number of defendant's motions without requiring plaintiff to file more than his "superabbreviated" response. This motion is denied. The pending motions will be ruled on in due course, according to the standards of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures. Those rules do not permit the kind of summary rulings plaintiff appears to believe he is entitled to. Rather, the court is required to read all the papers filed and issue a reasoned decision on the motion. This principle applies to both meritorious motions and motions that have no merit.
(2) Plaintiff's second motion also seems to seek a summary ruling on defendant's motions. The ruling is the same as above.
(3) Plaintiff's request that the court recuse itself is denied. There is no basis for a recusal in this case. This is unfortunate, because plaintiff earnestly desires recusal and this court, if it saw any legitimate basis for accommodating plaintiff's wish, would gladly do so.


Summaries of

More v. R L Carriers

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Feb 11, 2002
No. 00 CV 5583 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 11, 2002)
Case details for

More v. R L Carriers

Case Details

Full title:Robert J. More, Plaintiff, v. R L Carriers, et al. Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division

Date published: Feb 11, 2002

Citations

No. 00 CV 5583 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 11, 2002)

Citing Cases

Butler v. Sears, Roebuck Co.

The court's decision with regard to the claims dismissed with prejudice in Munch II remains binding on the…