Clark v. James

Filing 22

ORDER - The plaintiff's motion for decision and appeals 20 and motion for leave to proceed IFP 21 are denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (KBJ)

-PRSE Clark v. James

Doc. 22

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA KENNETH W. CLARK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) JAMES, ) ) Defendant. ) ______________________________)

4:10CV3045

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's motion for decision and appeals (Filing No. 20) and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") (Filing No. 21). will address each motion in turn. I. Motion for Decision and Appeals The Court

In his motion for decision and appeals, plaintiff states that he "would very much appreciate a speedy trial." However, the Court dismissed this matter and entered judgment against plaintiff on July 2, 2010 (Filing Nos. 16 and 17). Therefore, plaintiff's motion for decision and appeals will be denied as moot.1

To the extent that plaintiff intended his motion for decision and appeals to act as a notice of appeal, his motion is also denied. Plaintiff filed his motion more than thirty days after the Court entered judgment in this matter. (See Docket Sheet.) Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1) requires that the notice of appeal in a civil case be filed within thirty days after judgment is entered. "A timely notice of appeal is both mandatory and jurisdictional." Burgs v. Johnson County, Iowa, 79 F.3d 701, 702 (8th Cir. 1996).

1

Dockets.Justia.com

II.

Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP

Plaintiff also seeks leave to proceed IFP in this matter (Filing No. 21.) However, the Court previously granted As discussed

plaintiff leave to proceed IFP (Filing No. 7).

above, the Court dismissed this matter and entered judgment against plaintiff on July 2, 2010 (Filing Nos. 16 and 17.) Therefore, plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed IFP will also be denied as moot.2 IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for decision and appeals (Filing No. 20) and motion for leave to proceed IFP (Filing No. 21) are denied. DATED this 31st day of August, 2010. BY THE COURT: /s/ Lyle E. Strom ____________________________ LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge United States District Court

To the extent that plaintiff intended his motion for leave to proceed IFP to act as a motion for leave to appeal IFP, his motion is denied. As discussed above, plaintiff failed to file a notice of appeal within thirty days after judgment was entered in this matter. -2-

2

* This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court. -3-