Sims v. Randall et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment (filing no. 10 ) is denied. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MICHAEL JOSEPH SIMS,
GARY B. RANDALL, et al.,
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment, filed
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). (Filing No. 10.) In his Motion, Plaintiff seeks
reconsideration and reversal of the court’s June 11, 2012, Memorandum and Order which dismissed
Plaintiff’s Complaint because it contained claims that could not be brought in an action under “42
U.S.C. § 1983 until Plaintiff first obtains a favorable outcome in a habeas corpus or similar
proceeding.” (Filing No. 8.) The court has carefully reviewed Plaintiff’s Motion and finds no good
cause for amendment or alteration of any portion of its June 11, 2012, Memorandum and Order.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment (filing
no. 10) is denied.
DATED this 20th day of July, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or W eb 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.
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?