Valentine v. City of Omaha et al

Filing 74

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: The Plaintiff will not be granted permission to appeal in forma pauperis from the Court's prior denial of her motion to appeal in forma pauperis from the Court's denial of her motion for summary judgment, because t he Memorandum and Order (ECF No. 47 in Case No. 8:16cv131 and ECF No. 49 in Case No. 8:16cv174) denying the motions is not a final order or judgment and is not subject to appeal. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
VERONICA VALENTINE,
Plaintiff,

8:16CV131

vs.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CHRIS BROWN, #1873; 8 UNKNOWN
JANE - JOHN DOE OMAHA POLICE
OFFICERS, THE CITY OF OMAHA, LISA
VILLWOK, AND #1764; and JENNIFER
HANSEN, #1585;
Defendants;
VERONICA VALENTINE,
Plaintiff,

8:16CV174

vs.
ORDER
CITY OF OMAHA, CHIEF OF OMAHA
POLICE SCHMADER, UNKNOWN JOHN
JANE DOE POLICE, LISA VILLWOK,
AND #1764; and JENNIFER HANSEN,
#1585;
Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the Clerk’s IFP Memos (ECF No. 72 in Case
No. 8:16cv131 and ECF No. 73 in Case No. 8:16cv174). The Court previously denied
the Plaintiff permission to appeal in forma pauperis from the Court’s denial of her
motions for summary judgment because the Memorandum and Order, ECF No. 47 in
Case No. 8:16cv131 and ECF No. 49 in Case No. 8:16cv174, denying the motions was
not a final order or judgment subject to appeal. ECF No. 64 in Case No. 8:16cv131 and
ECF No. 65 in Case No. 8:16cv174. The Plaintiff has appealed that decision to the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and again requests permission to proceed in forma
pauperis. The Court will not grant the Plaintiff permission to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS ORDERED:
The Plaintiff will not be granted permission to appeal in forma pauperis from the
Court’s prior denial of her motion to appeal in forma pauperis from the Court’s denial of
her motion for summary judgment, because the Memorandum and Order (ECF No. 47
in Case No. 8:16cv131 and ECF No. 49 in Case No. 8:16cv174) denying the motions is
not a final order or judgment and is not subject to appeal.
Dated this 31st day of May, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief United States District Judge

2