Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de181> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 6 of
6
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de181 RegisterActionDate "2020-09-14" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de181 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 9/14/2020. Plaintiff has filed a motion for clarification and reconsideration regarding the August 31, 2020, Text Order 128 . Most of Plaintiff's motion simply repeats claims previously made and considered by the Court. However, Plaintiff notes the Court granted his motion clarifying the error in the pretrial order submitted by the parties which incorrectly stated Plaintiff's claims were pursuant to the Eighth Amendment. Plaintiff says the Court should reopen discovery since it was conducted with an Eighth Amendment standard, not the appropriate Fourteenth Amendment standard. Plaintiff misstates the clear record before this Court. Plaintiff was well aware his claim was pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment as he noted in his own motion to correct the record 127 . Plaintiff once again says the Court is required to delay his trial, "even if that's 50 years or more" until one of his witnesses is located. (Plain. Mot., p. 11). Plaintiff is incorrect. Plaintiff has had more than a year to locate his witness. This case will proceed to trial as planned. Finally, Plaintiff suggests the Court has "lied on the record" regarding the number of attorneys contacted in the Court's sua sponte attempt to find counsel to represent Plaintiff at trial, because the Court refused to provide him with the name of every attorney contacted. (Plain. Mot., p. 1). The Court has maintained a record of local attorneys contacted and has previously explained an email was sent to 1,554 attorneys through the Seventh Circuit Bar Association. See August 18, 2020, Case Management Order. This information is sufficient. Plaintiff may certainly disagree with the orders of this Court. However, Plaintiff is reminded even though he is proceeding pro se, his filings should not contain disrespectful or inappropriate commentary, or he could face sanctions, including dismissal of his case. Plaintiff's motion is denied 128 . (SAG, ilcd) (Entered: 09/14/2020)" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de181 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de181 OntologyLabel order @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de181 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de178 @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de181 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04127_de180 @default.