Chapman v. Poland et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying the Petitioner's 21 MOTION for Reconsideration. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
BILLIE JOE CHAPMAN,
ELLEN POLAND, MARK LUND,
STEVE JENKINS, JIM PAYNE,
HAROLD MURREN, JOHN/JANE
DOE, Mail Room Manager, and
JOHN/JANE DOE, Records
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion (Filing No. 21), which he
titled, “Motion for Reconsideration because Plaintiff has no control over his Account,
Defendants are Misleading.” Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the court’s Memorandum
and Order dated July 18, 2014, in which the court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint
because he failed to comply with the court’s order that he pay an initial partial filing fee
in the amount of $6.70.
As explained to Plaintiff on numerous occasions in this case and others, a plaintiff
must pay an initial partial filing fee in the amount of 20 percent of the greater of
Plaintiff’s average monthly account balance or average monthly deposits for the six
months preceding the filing of the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Here, the court
assessed an initial partial filing fee and warned Plaintiff that his case would be dismissed
if he failed to pay the initial partial filing fee by July 10, 2014. The July 10 deadline
passed and Plaintiff did not pay the initial partial filing fee or seek an extension of time
in which to do so. Accordingly, the court dismissed Plaintiff’s case. Upon careful
consideration, the court finds no good cause to reconsider any portion of its previous
order dismissing Plaintiff’s case without prejudice.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration
(Filing No. 21) is denied.
DATED this 29th day of July, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/ John M. Gerrard
United States District Judge
*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.
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?