Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;4:16-cv-04024_de112> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 4 of
4
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04024_de112 RegisterActionDate "2018-02-27" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04024_de112 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 2/27/2018. Plaintiff had filed an amended complaint alleging that Defendant Physicians B5463FE and Sood, and nurse practitioner 55043F4, were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical need. On 12/18/17, the Court granted Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Judgment entered, dismissing the case. On 1/16/18, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal. On 2/22/18, he filed 85 a Petition for Relief from Judgment. As the Petition was filed more than 28 days after the judgment, it would otherwise be reviewed under Rule 60, which allows reconsideration up to one year after final judgment. In this case, however, Plaintiff has a pending appeal and the District Court lacks jurisdiction to consider them. See Phillips v. United States, 668 F.3d 433, 436 (7th Cir. 2012), as amended on denial of reh'g and reh'g en banc (Feb. 21, 2012)(trial court lacks jurisdiction to decide a Rule 60 motion on the merits, where appeal is pending). 85 is MOOT. The Court notes that Plaintiffs petition appears to reference a retaliation claim against Defendants not previously named. This Order does not preclude Plaintiff filing the retaliation claim as a separate case with its own attendant filing fee. (JMB, ilcd) (Entered: 02/27/2018)" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04024_de112 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04024_de112 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04024_de111 @default.