Parker v. Ritter et al

Filing 153

MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 146 Plaintiff's Motion for Emergency Ruling and Reconsideration Due to Constitutional Violations; granting in part and denying in part 151 Emergency Motion for the Court to Accept Amended Com plaint Has [sic] Is Do [sic] to the On-Going [sic] Constitutional Violations. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks an extension of time to file an amended complaint and seeks to have the Court to accept his untimely amended complaint, the Motions are granted. To the extent that the Motions can be interpreted to seek relief for the alleged injuries which are the ultimate claims at issue in Plaintiffs case, the Motions are denied. Plaintiffs claims will be adjudicated in due course after case dead lines have been set, either pursuant to dispositive motion or trial. The Court accepts Plaintiffs amended complaint as filed and directs the Clerk to amend the 150 docket annotation to reflect that it is Plaintiffs SECOND FINAL AMENDED COMPLAINT. The parties shall use the caption set forth on all future pleadings. Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs Second Final Amended Complaint within ten (10) days of the date of this Minute Order, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 04/09/09.(wjc, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 08-cv-00737-MSK-KLM KEITH PARKER, Plaintiff, v. MR. BILL RITTER, Governor of the State of Colorado, MR. ARISTEDES W. ZAVARAS, Executive Director, MR. MARK BROADUS, MR. PAUL HOLLENBECK MR. ARELLANO, CAPTAIN HALL, MR. LEONARD VIGIL, MR. DAVID M. ZUPAN, MRS. D. WEBSTER, LT. MCCORMICK, MR. ENREQUIZ, LT. PIPER, MRS. SUSAN JONES, MRS. JILL HOGGARTH, MR. DR. [sic] MCHAUD, and LT. ROBERT STEINBECK, Defendant(s). _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Emergency Ruling and Reconsideration Due to Constitutional Violations [Docket No. 146; Filed March 30, 2009] and Emergency Motion for the Court to Accept Amended Complaint Has [sic] Is Do [sic] to the On-Going [sic] Constitutional Violations [Docket No. 151; April 8, 2009] (the "Motions"). On March 16, 2009, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to amend his complaint and set an April 6, 2009 filing deadline [Docket Nos. 139]. Prior to the deadline, Plaintiff moved for an extension of the deadline due to what he describes as efforts by Defendants to thwart his ability to litigate his case and his access to sufficient legal supplies [Docket No. 146]. On April 7, 2009, Plaintiff tendered an amended complaint per my Order, although he failed to call it a "Second Final Amended Complaint," as required [Docket No. 150]. Plaintiff also moved for the Court to accept the complaint as filed [Docket No. 151]. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motions are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks an extension of time to file an amended complaint and seeks to have the Court to accept his untimely amended complaint, the Motions are granted. To the extent that the Motions can be interpreted to seek relief for the alleged injuries which are the ultimate claims at issue in Plaintiff's case, the Motions are denied. Plaintiff's claims will be adjudicated in due course after case deadlines have been set, either pursuant to dispositive motion or trial. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court accepts Plaintiff's amended complaint as filed and directs the Clerk to amend the docket annotation to Docket No. 150 to reflect that it is Plaintiff's "SECOND FINAL AMENDED COMPLAINT." IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall use the caption set forth above on all future pleadings. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Second Final Amended Complaint within ten (10) days of the date of this Minute Order. Dated: April 9, 2009 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?