Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

BROWN v. DEPT. OF HEALTH & HUMAN SVS, 8:14CV298. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20150223946 Visitors: 10
Filed: Feb. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 20, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOSEPH F. BATAILLON, District Judge. This matter is before the court for case management. There are numerous motions pending in this matter, including Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 23 ) and Plaintiff's Motions to Appoint Counsel (Filing Nos. 8, 21, and 30 ), Motion to Reconsider (Filing No. 18 ), and "Motion in Support of Complaint" (Filing No. 29 ). The court has carefully reviewed the record and each of the pending motions. Upon careful consideration,
More

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JOSEPH F. BATAILLON, District Judge.

This matter is before the court for case management. There are numerous motions pending in this matter, including Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 23) and Plaintiff's Motions to Appoint Counsel (Filing Nos. 8, 21, and 30), Motion to Reconsider (Filing No. 18), and "Motion in Support of Complaint" (Filing No. 29). The court has carefully reviewed the record and each of the pending motions. Upon careful consideration,

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's Motions to Appoint Counsel dated October 7, 2014, and January 6, 2015 (Filing Nos. 8 and 21) are denied as moot in light of Plaintiff's laterfiled Motion to Appoint Counsel dated February 19, 2015 (Filing No. 30).

2. Plaintiff's latest request for the appointment of counsel (Filing No. 30) will remain pending and will be considered in conjunction with the court's review of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

3. Plaintiff's Motion to Reconsider (Filing No. 18) will remain pending and will be considered in conjunction with the court's review of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

4. Plaintiff's "Motion in Support of Complaint" (Filing No. 29) is an improper second response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and is denied. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to amend his claims to include additional allegations of retaliation, he must do so in a properly-filed amended complaint.

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer