Smith v. Michigan Parole Board et al

Filing 10

ORDER dismissing 9 Motion for Reconsideration re 7 Order Dismissing Case filed by Timothy Smith. Signed by District Judge Patrick J Duggan. (MOre)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TIMOTHY G. SMITH, #251105, Plaintiff, v. MICHIGAN PAROLE BOARD CHAIRMAN BARBARA SAMPSON, MICHIGAN PAROLE BOARD MEMBERS JODI DEANGELO, LAURIN THOMAS, MIGUEL BERRIOS, and CHARLES BROWN, GENESEE COUNTY SHERIFF ROBERT PICKELL, and GENESEE COUNTY PAROLE AGENT DEBORAH YANKEE-BEDNARSK, Defendants. ______________________________________/ ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration concerning the Court's March 3, 2010 dismissal of his pro se civil rights complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and on the basis of immunity. Plaintiff's motion must be denied. A motion for reconsideration which presents issues already ruled upon by the district court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, will not be granted. E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(h)(3); see also Hence v. Smith, 49 F. Supp. 2d 547, 550 (E.D. Mich. 1999). 1 CASE NO. 2:10-CV-10363 HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN Plaintiff raises just such issues in his motion. The Court has properly dismissed the complaint for the reasons stated in the opinion. Plaintiff has not met his burden of showing a palpable defect by which the Court has been misled or his burden of showing that a different disposition must result from a correction thereof, as required by Local Rule 7.1(h)(3). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. s/PATRICK J. DUGGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: March 29, 2010 Copy to: Timothy G. Smith, #251105 G. Robert Cotton Correctional Facility 3510 N. Elm Road Jackson, MI 49201 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?