RICHARD v. TALLANT, 4:14-cv-04027. (2016)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20160115n39
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 14, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 14, 2016
Summary: ORDER BARRY A. BRYANT , Magistrate Judge . By order (ECF No. 25) entered on February 2, 2015, the Court found that Plaintiff had waived his right to a jury trial by not making a timely demand. Plaintiff has filed a second motion for jury trial (ECF No. 28). The gist of Plaintiff's argument is that his failure to timely file a demand should be overlooked because of his pro se status. Plaintiff's pro se status does not excuse him from complying with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Summary: ORDER BARRY A. BRYANT , Magistrate Judge . By order (ECF No. 25) entered on February 2, 2015, the Court found that Plaintiff had waived his right to a jury trial by not making a timely demand. Plaintiff has filed a second motion for jury trial (ECF No. 28). The gist of Plaintiff's argument is that his failure to timely file a demand should be overlooked because of his pro se status. Plaintiff's pro se status does not excuse him from complying with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. ..
More
ORDER
BARRY A. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge.
By order (ECF No. 25) entered on February 2, 2015, the Court found that Plaintiff had waived his right to a jury trial by not making a timely demand. Plaintiff has filed a second motion for jury trial (ECF No. 28). The gist of Plaintiff's argument is that his failure to timely file a demand should be overlooked because of his pro se status. Plaintiff's pro se status does not excuse him from complying with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ackra Direct Marketing, Corp. v. Fingerhut Corp., 86 F.3d 852, 856 (8th Cir. 1996)("pro se representation does not excuse a party from complying . . . with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure"). The Motion (ECF No. 28) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
