Lewis v. University Medical Center et al
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that all pending motions are denied as frivolous and malicious. The clerk of the court shall not accept any further pleadings submitted by plaintiff for filing in this matter except for a notice of appeal. In the event that plaintiff submits pleadings, they will be returned to plaintiff under Case No. PS3001. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(ADB, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA ERIC FITZGERALD LEWIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ______________________________)
4:07CV3012
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter was recently reassigned to the undersigned Judge and has been closed for more than a year (Filing Nos. 18, 19, and 39.) Since the dismissal of this matter, plaintiff has
filed numerous motions, including four motions for reconsideration (Filing Nos. 21, 23, 30, and 32), two motions to refund filing fee (Filing Nos. 26 and 33), a request for a protection order against District Judge Laurie Smith Camp because she dismissed this matter (Filing No. 40), a motion to remove illegal Cat-Scan MRI from my neurology system (Filing No. 42), and several other motions. In September, plaintiff sent a letter to the clerk of the court attaching more than a foot-thick stack of documents.1 The documents consist primarily of state-court pleadings and correspondence, nonsensical handwritten letters to various
Plaintiff sent some of the documents through the U.S. Mail and had the rest delivered in person by someone identifying herself as plaintiff's cousin.
1
entities, handwritten versions/copies of state-court pleadings, copies of harassment orders filed by plaintiff in state court, newspaper clippings, and other documents (Filing No. 45.) It is
unclear what, if any, relief plaintiff seeks by filing all of these documents with the Court or if plaintiff simply seeks to use this Court as a storage facility for these documents. Regardless, the Court will take no action on these documents and they will not be filed but will be maintained by the clerk of the court in accordance with its normal procedures. Recently, plaintiff filed two additional motions which the clerk of the court docketed as miscellaneous motions (Filing Nos. 46 and 47.) These two motions do not seek any relief.
Instead, these filings are nonsensical, abusive, and threatening, consisting primarily of profanity directed to the Court. For
example, Filing No. 46 is directed to the "United States District Court Clerks," and accuses the Clerk's office of "bullshitting with my got-dam issues" and of being "phony ass motherfuckas." (Id. at CM/ECF p. 2.) Likewise, Filing No. 47, directed to the
undersigned judge, states that "if you not gone do any of these dam things, then it's time to jump the hell over Hruska Federal peoples," demands that District Judge Laurie Smith Camp testify
-2-
in plaintiff's assault case, and refers to Judge Smith Camp as "a ragady ass bitch." (Filing No. 47 at CM/ECF pp. 5-6, 17.)2
"The Court may, in its discretion, place reasonable restrictions on any litigant who files non-meritorious actions for obviously malicious purposes and who generally abuses judicial process." In re Tyler, 677 F. Supp. 1410, 1412 (D. Neb. Accordingly,
1987) (citations omitted). IT IS ORDERED: 1. malicious. 2.
All pending motions are denied as frivolous and
The clerk of the court shall not accept any
further pleadings submitted by plaintiff for filing in this matter except for a notice of appeal. In the event that
plaintiff submits pleadings, they will be returned to plaintiff under Case No. PS3001. DATED this 21st day of November, 2008. BY THE COURT: /s/ Lyle E. Strom _________________________________ LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge United States District Court
These quotations are rather mild compared to the rest of the pleadings. Indeed, plaintiff's recent filings are so full of profanity that they are nearly indecipherable. -3-
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?