Davis v. Walker et al

Filing 65

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 06/02/16 ordering plaintiff's pro se motions 54 , 62 and 63 are denied without prejudice to renewal. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KENNARD LEE DAVIS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:08-0593 KJM CKD P v. ORDER JAMES WALKER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 14, 17 18 2016, plaintiff was appointed a pro bono attorney, Brian Pomerantz, to represent him in this 19 matter.1 (ECF No. 51.) Since then, plaintiff has filed several pro se motions. (ECF Nos. 54, 63 20 & 62; see also ECF Nos. 57, 58 & 64.) Mr. Pomerantz recently filed a motion to withdraw as plaintiff’s attorney. (ECF No. 61.) 21 22 The court has yet to rule on that motion and, to date, plaintiff continues to be represented by 23 counsel. See L.R. 182(d) (“The authority and duty of the attorney of record shall continue until 24 relieved by order of the Court issued hereunder.”) Thus the court will disregard plaintiff’s 25 unauthorized pro se filings. Specifically, the court will deny plaintiff’s motions without prejudice 26 to renewal, either through counsel or at such time as plaintiff is proceeding pro se. Any 27 28 1 See also Davis v. Walker, et al., No. 2:10-cv-2139 KJM CKD. 1 1 2 outstanding issues can be addressed at the July 6, 2016 status conference. In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s pro se motions 3 (ECF Nos. 54, 63 & 62) are denied without prejudice to renewal. 4 Dated: June 2, 2016 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 2/davi0593.ord 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?