From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richardson v. Hickenloper

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 8, 2012
Civil Case No. 11-cv-01601-REB-MJW (D. Colo. May. 8, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 11-cv-01601-REB-MJW

05-08-2012

RONALD RICHARDSON, on behalf of himself and all others (now and in the future will be) similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. JOHN HICKENLOPER (sic), Governor of Colorado, DOUGLAS K. WILSON, State Public Defender, JAMES F. O'CONNOR, II, Head Administrator (ACPD) GRAYSON ROBINSON, Sheriff of Arapahoe County, JANE/JOHN DOE(S), Arapahoe County, JCC, JOHN DOE, Commissioner of Arapahoe County, JOHN/JANE DOE(S), (ACDF) Classification Committee, and DAVID WALCHER, Bureau Chief at (ACDF), These defendants are sued jointly and severally, in their official and/or individual capacities, Defendants.


Judge Robert E. Blackburn


ORDER DENYING MOTION TO TOLL APPEAL FOR

EXCUSABLE NEGLIGENCE . . . ALTERNATIVE NOTICE OF APPEAL

Blackburn, J.

The matter before me is plaintiff's Motion To Toll Appeal for Excusable Negligence . . . Alternative Notice of Appeal [#58] filed March 23, 2012. Plaintiff moves the court to afford him an additional 30 days to submit objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss all claims against all defendants, which this court approved and adopted on March 13, 2012 [#53], thus disposing of this case. I deny the motion.

"[#58]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's electronic case filing and management system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.

Although plaintiff claims not to have received a copy of the magistrate judge's recommendation, the CM/ECF system shows that notice was mailed to plaintiff on February 10, 2012, at the Arapahoe County Detention Facility. The law presumes that items properly addressed and placed in the mail was received. Witt v. Roadway Express, 136 F.3d 1424, 1429-30 (10th Cir. 1998). Although plaintiff has since been moved to the Denver Reception & Diagnostic Center, that transfer occurred nearly one month later, on March 7, 2012. (See Motion ¶ 1 at 1; Notice of Change of Address [#54] filed March 14, 2012.) He thus has failed to show good cause for his failure to file timely objections. See Lazarov v. Kimmel, 447 Fed. Appx. 873, 876 (10th Cir. Nov. 21, 2011), pet. for cert. filed (Feb. 21, 2012) (No. 11-9973).

THEREFORE IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion To Toll Appeal for Excusable Negligence . . . Alternative Notice of Appeal [#58] filed March 23, 2012, is DENIED.

Dated May 8, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

______________________

Robert E. Blackburn

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Richardson v. Hickenloper

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 8, 2012
Civil Case No. 11-cv-01601-REB-MJW (D. Colo. May. 8, 2012)
Case details for

Richardson v. Hickenloper

Case Details

Full title:RONALD RICHARDSON, on behalf of himself and all others (now and in the…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: May 8, 2012

Citations

Civil Case No. 11-cv-01601-REB-MJW (D. Colo. May. 8, 2012)