Williams v. Clark County School District, 2:16-cv-02248-APG-PAL. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20191112947
Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 07, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING (1) MOTION TO REOPEN CASE AND VACATE JUDGMENT, AND (2) MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE (ECF Nos. 50, 55) ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Plaintiff Shaquinta Williams's motion to reopen this case and vacate the judgment (ECF No. 50) is denied. Williams does not offer any sufficient reason to reopen this case and alter the judgment that was entered. Likewise, Williams's motion for leave to produce additional evidence (ECF No. 55) is denied. It is unclear
Summary: ORDER DENYING (1) MOTION TO REOPEN CASE AND VACATE JUDGMENT, AND (2) MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE (ECF Nos. 50, 55) ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Plaintiff Shaquinta Williams's motion to reopen this case and vacate the judgment (ECF No. 50) is denied. Williams does not offer any sufficient reason to reopen this case and alter the judgment that was entered. Likewise, Williams's motion for leave to produce additional evidence (ECF No. 55) is denied. It is unclear ..
More
ORDER DENYING (1) MOTION TO REOPEN CASE AND VACATE JUDGMENT, AND (2) MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE
(ECF Nos. 50, 55)
ANDREW P. GORDON, District Judge.
Plaintiff Shaquinta Williams's motion to reopen this case and vacate the judgment (ECF No. 50) is denied. Williams does not offer any sufficient reason to reopen this case and alter the judgment that was entered. Likewise, Williams's motion for leave to produce additional evidence (ECF No. 55) is denied. It is unclear exactly what Ms. Williams is requesting in the motion, but there is no basis to allow additional evidence at this point. Ms. Williams was represented by counsel throughout this case and had sufficient opportunity to present evidence.
Source: Leagle
