TELFORD v. U.S., 7:13CV5001. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20141107a14
Visitors: 14
Filed: Nov. 06, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 06, 2014
Summary: ORDER LYLE E. STROM, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court on three motions filed by plaintiff (Filing No. 41, Filing No. 45, Filing No. 47 ). This action was dismissed on October 8, 2014, when defendant's motion to dismiss was granted (Filing No. 36 and Filing No. 37 ). The plaintiff did not timely respond to the government's motion to dismiss despite the Court granting her three extensions spanning four months (Filing No. 30, Filing No. 32, Filing No. 34 ). Yet
Summary: ORDER LYLE E. STROM, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court on three motions filed by plaintiff (Filing No. 41, Filing No. 45, Filing No. 47 ). This action was dismissed on October 8, 2014, when defendant's motion to dismiss was granted (Filing No. 36 and Filing No. 37 ). The plaintiff did not timely respond to the government's motion to dismiss despite the Court granting her three extensions spanning four months (Filing No. 30, Filing No. 32, Filing No. 34 ). Yet,..
More
ORDER
LYLE E. STROM, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on three motions filed by plaintiff (Filing No. 41, Filing No. 45, Filing No. 47). This action was dismissed on October 8, 2014, when defendant's motion to dismiss was granted (Filing No. 36 and Filing No. 37).
The plaintiff did not timely respond to the government's motion to dismiss despite the Court granting her three extensions spanning four months (Filing No. 30, Filing No. 32, Filing No. 34). Yet, since the case was dismissed, the plaintiff has filed numerous redundant motions for new trial and to set aside judgments in other jurisdictions. After review of relevant case law, the motions, and briefs, the Court finds the motions should be denied.
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's motions (Filing No. 41, Filing No. 45, and Filing No. 47) are denied.
Source: Leagle
