Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. v. Wall Street Equity Group, Inc. et al

Filing 380

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying Defendant West's 378 Motion for Reconsideration for Additional Time to Secure Competent Counsel and to Retry All Matters Because of Ineffective Counsel. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (copies mailed) (MKR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
PETER KIEWIT SONS', INC.,
Plaintiff,

8:10CV365

vs.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WALL STREET EQUITY GROUP, INC.,
WALL STREET GROUP OF
COMPANIES, INC., SHEPHERD
FRIEDMAN, STEVEN S. WEST,
Defendants.
For the reasons previously discussed in my memorandum and order dated March
15, 2013, a copy of which is attached,

IT IS ORDERED that defendant West’s Motion for Reconsideration for
Additional Time to Secure Competent Counsel and to Retry All Matters Because of
Ineffective Counsel on behalf of Defendant Steven S. West, (Filing No. 378), is denied.

April 22, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Cheryl R. Zwart
United States Magistrate Judge

8:10-cv-00365-JMG-CRZ Doc # 374 Filed: 03/15/13 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID # 5615

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
PETER KIEWIT SONS', INC.,
Plaintiff,

8:10CV365

vs.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WALL STREET EQUITY GROUP, INC.,
WALL STREET GROUP OF COMPANIES,
INC., SHEPHERD FRIEDMAN, STEVEN S.
WEST,
Defendants.
Defendant Steven S. West has filed a motion for reconsideration and for additional time
to obtain counsel. West claims he needs an additional 30 days to locate a new attorney. He
further asks that matters previously litigated be re-litigated because of the alleged improper and
unethical actions of his prior counsel of record. See Filing No. 373.

West remains able to retain counsel and have an attorney enter an appearance on his
behalf—a development which could occur before or after thirty days from now. The court need
not enter an order setting a thirty-day timeline. And to the extent West is asking the court to stay
this case while West looks for a new attorney, his request is denied.

Finally, West’s request to reopen and re-litigate prior proceedings due to Ms. Hesford’s
alleged misconduct is denied. A client is “generally bound by the actions (or inaction) of his
attorney when his attorney acts in her representational capacity.”

Rodgers v. Curators of

University of Missouri, 135 F.3d 1216, 1220 (8th Cir. 1998).

March 15, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Cheryl R. Zwart
United States Magistrate Judge

8:10-cv-00365-JMG-CRZ Doc # 374 Filed: 03/15/13 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID # 5616

*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.

2