Weast v. Family Dollar Distribution Center
ORDER denying 64 Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration of the dismissal of Anita Brown-Wilson & Yvonne Carr; denying 64 Plaintiff's Motion for Issuance of summons. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 6/4/2010. (jct)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION BROCK WEAST VS. 3 :09CV00196-JMM DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF
FAMILY DOLLAR DISTRIBUTION CENTER, et al. ORDE R
Pending is Plaintiff's pleading filed May 27, 2010, the Court will interpret the pleading as a motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of Anita Brown-Wilson ("Brown-Wilson") and Yvonne Carr ("Carr") and a request for issuance of summons. (Docket # 64). For the reasons stated in the Court's Order entered May 12, 2010, Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Further, by Order entered May 14, 2010, the Court cautioned Plaintiff that he is required to provide an address for service of process. See Lee v. Armontrout, 991 F.2d 487, 489 (8th Cir.) (per curiam) (plaintiffs proceeding in forma pauperis are responsible for providing defendants' addresses), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 875, 114 S.Ct. 209, 126 L.Ed.2d 166 (1993). Plaintiff's attempt to serve former employees of Defendant's company by service on Defense counsel is insufficient. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e) sets forth the requirements for proper service on an individual, Plaintiff is required to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Therefore, Plaintiff's request for summons is DENIED. For the reasons set forth herein, Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 4th day of June, 2010. ______________________________ James M. Moody United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?